UC-NRLF 
 
 THE NORTHEASTERN 
 
 BOUNDARY 
 
 SPRAGUE 
 
LIBRARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
 Class 
 
Joirx FAI i:i i i:u> 
 GOVFHXOH oi MAIM:, 1 Slif) 
 
The North Eastern Boundary 
 
 Controversy and the 
 
 Aroostook War 
 
 BY JOHN FRANCIS SPRAGUE 
 
 Dover, Maine 
 The Observer Press 
 
 The foot-note pp. 12-13 refers to the report of the commissioners 
 made October 25, 1798. 
 
398 
 
The North Eastern Boundary Contro 
 versy and the Aroostook War 
 
 By John Francis Sprague 
 
 A SERIOUS disagreement existed between the 
 United States and Great Britain from the treaty 
 of peace (1783) to the Webster-Ashburton treaty 
 (1842), respecting the boundary line between what is 
 now and was in 1842, the State of Maine and Canada, 
 and known in history as the Northeast Frontier. 
 
 In tracing back to the sources of this contention, 
 which was acute for more than a half century, it 
 seems to me that two causes were among the earliest and 
 most predominating which led up to the general confu 
 sion. 
 
 The first was the fact that the English sovereigns 
 were very ignorant of American geography and were 
 perpetually making grants of lands irreconciliably and 
 often grotesquely conflicting, and the second was the 
 instinctive desire of the Anglo Saxon to possess himself 
 of all of the territory of this earth within his reach. 
 
 In 1493, Alexander VI, Pope of Rome, issued a bull, 
 granting the New World, which Columbus had discov 
 ered, to the sovereigns of Spain and Portugal. 
 
 In that age a papal bull was generally regarded by 
 Christian nations as a sufficient title to heathen lands, 
 and under this title Spain claimed the entire North 
 American coast from Cape Florida to Cape Breton. 
 
 221044 
 
w 
 
 France, although a Catholic nation, was in unison 
 with England, which had then become Protestant, in 
 protesting against such an exclusive and unfair grant. 
 
 So far as there was an issue between England and 
 Spain about American territory it was settled by Sir 
 Francis Drake in 1588, by the victory over the Spanish 
 Armada in the British Channel, which has been the scene 
 of so many famous naval battles and where so much of 
 the world s history has been made. 
 
 But England had not submitted to the slow process of 
 waiting for the God of battles to determine her rights 
 by discovery and conquest as they then stood in the 
 western hemisphere. In 1495-6, three years after its 
 discovery and before Columbus had seen it, Henry VII, 
 King of England, issued a commission to John Cabot 
 and his sons, "to seek out, discover and find whatsoever 
 Isles, Countries, Regions or Provinces of the heathens 
 and infidels" hitherto unknown to all Christians, and, 
 as vassals of the king, to hold the same by his authority. 
 
 In 1502, the same king issued authority to Hugh 
 Eliot and Thomas Ashurst to discover and take possession 
 of the "Islands and Continents" in America. 
 
 As early as 1524 and many years before England had 
 actually asserted jurisdictional rights on this continent, 
 Francis I, King of France, doubted the "clause in 
 Adam s will" which made this continent the incontro 
 vertible possession of "his brothers of Spain and Portu 
 gal" and sent out discoverers and explorers, who explored 
 the entire coast from the thirtieth to the fiftieth degree 
 of latitude, and named the whole region New France. 
 
 Ten years later Jacques Quartier, known in English 
 history as "Cartier," commissioned by the same king, 
 made several voyages to America and took possession of 
 Canada. The French government maintained it ever 
 after until its titles were lost by treaties and conquest. 
 
[5] 
 
 On the 8th of November, 1603, Henry IV, King of 
 France, appointed Pier de Monts, his lieutenant-general, 
 in the country, territories, coast and limits of Cadia, 
 (la Cadia) since called Acadia, commencing at the fortieth 
 degree and thence to the forty-sixth degree. 
 
 By charter of the 10th of September, 1621, James I 
 granted to Sir William Alexander, a certain territory, 
 under the name of "Nova Scotia," with the following 
 boundaries :* "Beginning at Cape Sable, in forty-three 
 degrees north latitude, or thereabout, extending thence 
 westwardly along the seashore, to the road commonly 
 called St. Mary s Bay; thence towards the north by a 
 direct line crossing the entrance or mouth of that great 
 ship road, which runs into the eastern tract of land 
 between the territories of the Souriquois and of the 
 Etchemins, (Bay of Fundy) to the river commonly 
 called St. Croix, and to the most remote spring or 
 source, which, from the western part thereof, first 
 mingles itself with the river aforesaid; from thence, by 
 an imaginary direct line, which may be conceived to 
 stretch through the land, or to run towards the north, to 
 the nearest road, river or spring emptying itself into the 
 great river de Canada (River St. Lawrence) ; and from 
 thence proceeding eastwardly along the seashores of the 
 said river de Canada, to the river, road, port, or shore, 
 commonly known and called by the name of Gachepe or 
 Gaspe; and thence south- eastwardly to the islands 
 called Baccaleos or Cape Breton, leaving these islands on 
 the right and the gulf of the said river de Canada or of 
 the great ship road and the lands of Newfoundland, with 
 the islands to the same pertaining, on the left; and 
 thence to the head land or promontory of Cape Breton 
 aforesaid, lying near the latitude of forty-five degrees, or 
 thereabout; and from the said promontory of Cape 
 Breton, towards the south and west, to Cape Sable afore- 
 
[6] 
 
 said, where the perambulation began, ***** 
 all which lands aforesaid, shall at all times hereafter be 
 called and known by the name of Nova Scotia, or New 
 Scotland, in America. 
 
 Albert Gallatin in his introduction to "The Right of 
 the United States of America to the North Eastern 
 Boundary Claimed by Them," (1840) says: 
 
 "The western boundary thereby assigned to Nova 
 Scotia differs from the eastern boundary of the United 
 States, as described by the treaty of peace of 1783, in 
 the following particulars. 
 
 "1st. The western source of the river St. Croix was 
 intended by Sir William Alexander s charter; but by 
 the treaty of 1788, the said river from its mouth to its 
 source, without particularly designating which source, is 
 made the boundary ; and this has been decided to be the 
 river from its mouth to the source of its north branch. 
 
 "2nd. The line from the source of the River St. 
 Croix, is, according to the charter, to run towards the 
 north ; (versus septentrionem ;) by the treaty, it must 
 run due north, or directly north. 
 
 "3rd. The said line, by the charter, extends to the 
 river St. Lawrence, and, by the treaty, to the highlands 
 dividing the rivers, &c. " 
 
 On the 3d of April, 1639, Charles I granted to 
 Ferdinand Gorges, by the name of Province or Country 
 of Maine, a territory bounded on the west by Piscata- 
 way Harbor and the river Newichewanocke, (Piscataqua 
 River) to the farthest head thereof, and thence one hun 
 dred and twenty miles northwestwards, extending from 
 Piscataway Harbor, northeastwards, along the seacoast 
 to Sagadahock, (the river Kennebec below the confluence 
 of the river Androscoggin, ) and up the river thereof to 
 Kynybecky River, and, through the same, to the head 
 thereof, and into the land northwestwards one hundred 
 
m 
 
 and twenty miles from the mouth of Sagadahock, Etc. 
 
 This last named grant was purchased in the year 1 674, 
 by the Colony of Massachusetts. 
 
 By the twelfth article of the treaty of Utrecht, in 
 1713, "the Most Christian King of France" ceded to 
 the Queen of England in perpetuity Acadia or Nova 
 Scotia entire, "according to its ancient boundaries," Etc. 
 
 But what its "ancient boundaries" were was for 
 nearly fifty years after the treaty of Utrecht a matter of 
 dispute between England and France and more especially 
 between the pioneers and settlers of New France, and the 
 Massachusetts Colony and the inhabitants of the Province 
 of Maine, who had settled east of the Kennebec River. 
 
 The Governor of New France contended that the 
 ancient bounds of Acadia extended as far west as the 
 Kennebec River under the grant of Charles I to Gorges, 
 and had never been changed by any act of England. 
 
 Attempts at a settlement were made between the two 
 governments at various times but the results were futile. 
 
 When Wolfe conquered Quebec in 1759, all of Canada 
 passed to the domain of the English by conquest and the 
 minor questions of boundary lines were lost sight of. 
 
 Incidental to this long contention as to what was the 
 westerly line of Acadia, was the destruction of the Jesuit 
 Mission at Norridgevvock and the killing of its missionary, 
 Father Sebastian Rale, in 1724, by the Massachusetts 
 colonists. 
 
 Gallatin in the work above referred to, in speaking of 
 this Gorges grant and its subsequent purchase by the 
 Colony of Massachusetts, asserts that it throws no light 
 en the question as to how England acquired any title to 
 the territory between the Kennebec and St. Croix, and 
 says: "Although the name of Maine has since been 
 extended to the country, eastwardly, as far as the bounda 
 ries of Nova Scotia, the ancient Province of Maine, 
 
[8] 
 
 according to the aforesaid original grant, was bounded 
 on the east by the river Sadahock or Kennebec. " 
 
 These facts are only referred to here, parenthetically, 
 for the purpose of calling attention to the generally 
 chaotic condition of the sources of the jurisdictional 
 rights of England in the Province of Maine, at the time 
 of the treaty of peace in 1783. 
 
 The English had themselves, whether wrongfully or 
 rightfully, whether by overt acts or not, made permanent 
 the title of Massachusetts to the Province of Maine as far 
 east as the St. Croix River, but how far north it extended 
 was another matter and one of the principal causes of all 
 the trouble between the people of Maine and New 
 Brunswick and the American and English governments. 
 
 In the several treaties between France and England 
 ceding to each other Acadia, no specific mention is made 
 of boundaries, so the student is obliged to rely upon the 
 grants from the English crown to its subjects for informa 
 tion as to what was the original intent of the English 
 , government, regarding the northerly line of the Province 
 of Maine. 
 
 On the 12th day of March, 1663, Charles II granted 
 to his brother James, Duke of York, "all that part of 
 the main land of New England, beginning at a certain 
 place, called or known by the name of St. Croix adjoin 
 ing to New Scotland in America, and from thence extend 
 ing along the sea coast, into a place called Pemaquin or 
 Pemaquid, and so up the river thereof to the furtherest 
 head of the same as it tendeth northward to the river of 
 Kennebec and so up, by the shortest course, to the river 
 of Canada, northwards." 
 
 All authorities agreed that the name "Maine" at some 
 time in some way extended over all the above described 
 territory and that the river Kennebec was what was in 
 
[9] 
 
 the ancient maps Sadahock, and that "the river Canada" 
 was the river St. Lawrence. 
 
 October 7th, 1691, William and Mary, by grant, 
 annexed to the charter of the Massachusetts Colony, 
 Nova Scotia, the ancient Province of Maine, and Saga- 
 dahock, or the Duke of York s grant, containing how 
 ever, this proviso, "and it is our royal will and pleasure 
 that no grants of any lands lying or extending from the 
 river Sagadahock (Kennebec) to the Gulf of St. Lawrence 
 and Canada rivers, (St. Lawrence River) and to the main 
 sea northward and eastward, to be made or passed by 
 the Governor and General Assembly of our said Province, 
 be of any force, validity, or effect, until we, our assigns 
 and successors shall have signified our or their approba 
 tion of the same." 
 
 This grant is valuable herein, only for the purpose of 
 showing that the English then claimed territory as far 
 north as the St. Lawrence. 
 
 There does not seem to be any reason for this grant of 
 Nova Scotia or Acadia to Massachusetts, which had been 
 restored to France by the treaty of Breda, other than the 
 fact that a state of war existed between the nations in 
 1691. 
 
 By the treaty of Ryswick, (1697) Great Britain, how 
 ever, agreed to restore to France "all countries, islands, 
 forts and colonies, wheresoever situated, which the 
 French did possess before the declaration of war. 
 
 The Massachusetts Colony asserted jurisdiction over 
 all of that part of the Province of Maine annexed to 
 their charter by William and Mary, which was situated 
 east of the Kennebec River, and the last claim of the 
 French to this territory was extinguished with the 
 destruction of the Kennebec Mission in 1724. 
 
 Subsequent to this a question arose among the colonists 
 as to their legal title to the territory between the Kenne- 
 
[10] 
 
 bee and St. Croix, which was referred to the attorney 
 and solicitor general of the crown, who gave it as their 
 opinion (Aug. 11, 1731) "that all the tract of land 
 lying between the rivers of Kennebec and St. Croix, is 
 granted by their charter to the inhabitants of the said 
 Province; that the rights of government granted to the 
 said Province extend over this tract of land. 
 
 In Mitchell s map in the year 1755, the river St. 
 Croix, in accordance with their decision, and a due north 
 line from its source to the river St. Lawrence, are made 
 the boundary between Nova Scotia and New England. 
 
 And Gallatin says that "in this map the river St. 
 Croix, and a due north line from its source to the river 
 St. Lawrence, are, accordingly, made the boundary 
 between Nova Scotia and New England; embracing, 
 under this last designation, the eastern part of Massa 
 chusetts, by the name of Sagadahock. 
 
 Both Nova Scotia and New England are, in that map, 
 published with the approbation of the board of trade, 
 bounded to the north by the river St. Lawrence. And 
 that river continued, accordingly, to be the northern 
 boundary of both, till the 7th of October, 1763; when 
 Canada, and all the possessions claimed by France in 
 that quarter, having, by virtue of the treaty of peace 
 of February, 1763, been definitively ceded by her to 
 Great Britain, His Britannic Majesty issued a proclama 
 tion establishing new governments, and, amongst others, 
 that of Quebec. 
 
 The boundaries of that government were, by the said 
 proclamation, fixed as follows: "Bounded on the Labra 
 dor Coast by the river St. John ; and from thence, by a 
 line drawn from the head of that river, through the Lake 
 St. John, to the south end of the Lake Nipissing, from 
 whence the said line, crossing the river St. Lawrence and 
 the Lake Charnplain, in forty-five degrees of north lati- 
 
[11] 
 
 tude, passes along the Highlands which divide the rivers 
 that empty themselves into the said river St. Lawrence 
 from those which fall into the sea, and also along the 
 north coast of the Bay des Chaleurs and the Coast of the 
 Gulf of St. Lawrence, to Cape Rosiers ; and from thence, 
 crossing the mouth of the river St. Lawrence, by the 
 west end of the island of Anticosti, terminates at the 
 aforesaid river St. John. 
 
 The Highlands designated above were thus assigned as 
 the southern boundary of the province of Quebec and 
 became the northern boundary of Nova Scotia; the 
 northwest corner of which, instead of being, as hereto 
 fore, on the banks of the St. Lawrence, was thereby 
 placed on the Highlands. 
 
 This boundary of the Province of Quebec was again 
 ratified by the British government by the act of Parlia 
 ment of the 14th, Geo. Ill, Chap. 83, (1774) commonly 
 called the Quebec Act. 
 
 The treaty of peace between the Colonies and England 
 at the close of the war of the Revolution and known in 
 history as the treaty of 1783, provides "And that all 
 disputes, which might arise in the future on the subject 
 of the boundaries of the said United States, may be 
 prevented, it is hereby agreed and declared, that teh 
 following are and shall be their boundaries, viz: From 
 the northwest angle of Nova Scotia, viz: that angle 
 which is formed by a line drawn due north from the 
 source of the St. Croix River, to the Highlands, which 
 divide those rivers, that empty themselves into the river 
 St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic 
 Ocean, to the northwesternmost head of Connecticut 
 River ; east, by a line to be drawn along the middle of 
 the river St. Croix, from its mouth in the Bay of Fundy 
 to its source; and from its source, directly north, to the 
 aforesaid Highlands, which divide the rivers which fall 
 
into the Atlantic Ocean from those that fall into the 
 river St. Lawrence." 
 
 Subsequent to this treaty doubts arose as to which was 
 the St. Croix River, and commissioners were appointed 
 
 T s ~\ f~ 
 
 ftf~y r ~ __ un der the P^oj^ipJ^_^fi^s fifth article who declared * 
 
 October 5198 river called "Scoodiac," and 
 
 the northern branch of it (called "Cheputnaticook") to 
 be the true river St. Croix as intended by the treaty, 
 that its mouth was in the Bay of Passamaquoddy at a 
 place called Joe s Point, and its source at the northern 
 most head spring of the northern branch aforesaid. 
 
 During the War of 1812 the British seized and held 
 Moose Island on which the city of Eastport now stands, 
 and at the treaty of Ghent they refused to restore it. 
 
 It was generally stipulated that all territory, places, 
 and possessions taken by either party during the war 
 should be restored, and it was specially provided that such 
 of the islands in Passamaquoddy Bay as were claimed by 
 both parties, should remain in the possession of the party 
 in whose occupation they might be at the time of the 
 exchange or the ratification of the treaty, without 
 prejudice to either party, till the question of title should 
 be settled. For such a settlement Art. IV provided 
 that the question should be referred to two commis 
 sioners to be appointed by the two governments. 
 
 The King of Great Britain appointed Thomas Barclay 
 and President Madison appointed John Holmes, who was 
 a resident of the Province or District of Maine. 
 
 Their decision, which was rendered November 24, 
 1817, seems to have been acquiesced in by all parties 
 and with a few exceptions I do not find that it was very 
 seriously criticised by the writers at that time. * 
 
 The first question that arose before these commissioners was, 
 which of the three rivers falling into the Bay of Fundy was the St. 
 Croix contemplated by the treaty of 1783. 
 
[13] 
 
 It was well understood by both governments that the 
 boundary line of Nova Scotia was left very indefinite by 
 the treaty of 1783, but as there were but few settlers on 
 the disputed territory and but little business or com 
 merce, and as both nations were engrossed in struggles 
 with each other of more consequence, there was but little 
 controversy about it. 
 
 The fact was, however, recognized by the treaty of 
 Ghent (1814) and they made provision for its adjustment 
 
 These rivers had all been known and described at various times by 
 the name of St. Croix. The most easterly had likewise been called 
 the Magaquadavic ; the intermediate, the Schoodic; the most west 
 erly, the Cobscook. 
 
 The decision of the commissioners was that the middle river, 
 known sometimes as the Schoodic, was the true St. Croix River. It 
 having been thus fixed, it was so regarded by both governments, at 
 the treaty of Ghent, and in the proceedings when the whole matter 
 was finally adjusted by the Webster- Ashburton treaty. 
 
 It has, however, been the opinion of students of history who have 
 since investigated the subject, that a grave error was committed, by 
 which the American government, and ultimately the State of Maine, 
 were grossly wronged, that if the subject had been properly con 
 sidered and fairly adjudicated, the easterly river, rather than the 
 Schoodic or the intermediate river, would have been the easterly 
 boundary of the State of Maine. 
 
 Probably no man in the days of this controversy gave the subject 
 more consideration than the late Col. John G. Deane of Portland, 
 and formerly of Ellsworth. He was a leading member of the Legis 
 lature during that time and was the author of several official reports 
 relating to the North Eastern Boundary, and he was firmly con 
 vinced that the commissioners selected the wrong river for the St. 
 Croix. 
 
 By this blunder, if such it were, Col. Deane estimated that the 
 State of Maine "lost a strip of territory from fifteen to twenty 
 miles in breadth, and one hundred and seventy-five miles in 
 length." 
 
 (See a sketch of the life of John G. Deane, Maine Hist. Coll. 
 2d Series, Vol. 1, p. 179. "The North Eastern Boundary," by 
 Israel Washburn, Jr., read before the Maine Historical Society, 
 May 15, 1879.) 
 
[14] 
 
 by the fifth article of this treaty, a part of which is as 
 follows : 
 
 "Whereas neither that point of the Highlands lying 
 due north from the source of the River St. Croix, arid 
 designated in the former treaty of Peace between the 
 two Powers, as the north-west angle of Nova Scotia, nor 
 the north-western most head of the Connecticut River, 
 has yet been ascertained; and whereas that part of the 
 boundary line between the Dominions of the two Powers, 
 which extends from the source of the River St. Croix, 
 directly north, to the above-mentioned north-west angle 
 of Nova Scotia ; thence, along the said Highlands which 
 divide those rivers that empty themselves into the River 
 St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic 
 Ocean, to the north-western most head of Connecticut 
 River; thence, down along the middle of that river, to 
 the forty-fifth degree of north latitude ; thence, by a line 
 due west, on said latitude, until it strikes the River 
 Iroquois or Cataraquy, has not yet been surveyed ; it is 
 agreed that for those several purposes, two Commissioners 
 shall be appointed, sworn and authorized to act, &c. 
 ******* rp ne sa -j Commissioners shall 
 have power to ascertain and determine the points above 
 mentioned, in conformity with the provisions of the said 
 treaty of Peace of 1783, and shall cause the boundary 
 aforesaid, from the source of the River St. Croix to the 
 River Iroquois or Cataraquy, to be surveyed and marked 
 according to the said provisions. The said Commission 
 ers shall make a map of the said boundary and annex to 
 it a declaration under their hands and seals, certifying it 
 to be the true map of the said boundary, and particular 
 izing the latitude and longitude of the north-west angle 
 of Nova Scotia, of the north-western most head of Con 
 necticut River, and of such other points of the said 
 boundary as they may deem proper. And both parties 
 
[15] 
 
 agree to consider such map and declaration as finally 
 and conclusively fixing the said boundary." 
 
 The same article further provided for a reference to a 
 friendly sovereign or state, in the event of the commis 
 sioners being unable to agree. 
 
 The two governments appointed commissioners con- 
 formitory with this provision, namely, George III 
 appointed on the part of Great Britain, Thomas Barclay, 
 September 4, 1815, and President Madison appointed 
 Cornelius Van Ness, April 3, 1816. Mr. Van Ness was 
 a native of New York but at the time of his appoint 
 ment resided in Vermont, and it appears that John 
 Holmes, w r ho was one of the commissioners to adjudicate 
 in regard to the titles of the islands in Passamaquoddy 
 Bay, also acted with them. Henry H. Orne was 
 appointed secretary to this commission. Mr. Orne, who 
 in the record was simply described as "a citizen of the 
 United States," was presumably Judge Henry Orne of 
 Boston, from whom the town of Orneville in the county 
 of Piscataquis derived its name. 
 
 This commission, after sitting for five years, could not 
 even agree on a plan for a general map of the country 
 exhibiting the boundaries respectively claimed by each 
 party ; much less could they settle any of the matters 
 referred to them. 
 
 They accordingly dissolved and made separate reports 
 to both governments, stating the points on which they 
 differed, and the grounds of their difference. 
 
 Soon after the close of the War of 1812, settlements, 
 not only in the northeastern parts of the Province of 
 Maine, but in Nova Scotia and Quebec as well, began to 
 increase; business was expanding and land under both 
 flags was becoming more valuable. 
 
 All of these things tended to reawaken the interest in 
 
[16] 
 
 the question of boundary lines between the two 
 dominions. 
 
 Maine became a state in 1820, and by the Articles of 
 Separation the Commonwealth of Massachusetts re 
 served to herself one half of the unincorporated lands 
 within the Province of Maine. * 
 
 Hence not only the inhabitants of eastern Maine, but 
 both of these states were intensely interested in having 
 the matter decided. 
 
 Finally the statesmen of both governments concluded 
 that a condition had arisen which made it necessary to 
 refer the points of difference to a friendly sovereign under 
 the terms of the treaty of Ghent ; and on the 29th day 
 of September, 1827, a convention to that effect was con 
 cluded. 
 
 Consequently in 1826, Albert Gallatin, who was one 
 of the commissioners of the United States at Ghent in 
 1814, went to England as minister of the United States, 
 charged with the duty of arranging various questions of 
 difference and among them the North Eastern Boundary. 
 He had many conferences with the plenipotentiaries rep 
 resenting that government, the principal result of which 
 was the convention to refer the matter to a friendly 
 sovereign under the provision of the treaty of Ghent 
 herein before referred to. 
 
 The statements of the United States were prepared 
 and submitted to the arbitrator by Mr. Gallatin who had 
 associated with him Wm. Pitt Preble of Portland, t 
 
 *Act of Separation passed by Legislature of Massachusetts June 
 19, 1819, Sec. 1, part first. 
 
 tWilliam P. Preble was a resident of Portland and was born in 
 York, Me., November 27, 1T83, and died October 11, 1857. He was 
 graduated from Harvard College in 1806, studied law with Benjamin 
 Hasey at Topsham and Mr. Orr in Brunswick. Practiced law in 
 Alfred and Saco before he removed to Portland in 1818. In 1814 he 
 
[17] 
 
 It was stipulated therein that Mitchell s map, by 
 which the framers of the treaty of 1783 had regulated 
 their j oint and official proceedings, and a map denomi 
 nated A, had been agreed upon by the contracting 
 parties, as a delineation of the water courses and a 
 general outline of the territory. 
 
 The King of the Netherlands was selected as arbiter 
 and when he heard the case of the high contracting 
 parties, changes of magnitude had taken place in both 
 the American and English possessions since the treaty of 
 1783. 
 
 The Province of Maine was independent from the 
 mother Commonwealth of Massachusetts and had entered 
 upon her career as a sovereign state of the Union. 
 
 Nova Scotia had been divided and a new province 
 erected called New Brunswick, within the borders of 
 which was the territory about which the contention had 
 arisen, and Quebec had been made into two provinces, 
 then known as Upper Canada and Lower Canada. 
 
 The task imposed upon the arbiter was an onerous one 
 but the duties were plain and not at all obscure. 
 
 He was to construe the provisions of the treaty of 
 1783, which related to this boundary, and make a deci 
 sion which, if ratified by the two governments, would be 
 binding upon them. 
 
 This necessitated his making findings among other 
 things as to the following questions : 
 
 received the appointment of U. S. District Attorney from President 
 Madison. 
 
 In 1820 he was selected as one of the three judges composing the 
 highest judicial court of the new State of Maine. 
 
 In 1828 he resigned from the bench and entered upon diplomatic 
 service. 
 
 President Jackson appointed him Minister Plenipotentiary to The 
 Hague, and he was serving in this capacity when the King of Hol 
 land rendered his decision. He was in various ways active in the 
 affairs of the North Eastern Boundary question until its final settle 
 ment by the Webster-Ashburton treaty. 
 
[18] 
 
 1. What was the "north-west angle of Nova Scotia?" 
 
 2. The "Source" of the St. Croix River? 
 
 3. What were the "Highlands," which "divide 
 those rivers that empty themselves into the River St. 
 Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic Ocean?" 
 
 4. What was the "Northwesternmost head of the 
 Connecticut River?" 
 
 Incidental with, or subordinate to these Avere other 
 questions which arose in the investigations and discus 
 sions as the case progressed before him, but I regard the 
 foregoing as the principal or leading points in the con 
 troversy. 
 
 It was undoubtedly unfortunate for all parties to this 
 imbroglio, that, in designating the northerly boundary 
 between the territory of Massachusetts (Province of 
 Maine) and Nova Scotia, in the treaty of 1783, the 
 term "Highlands" should have been used. It was 
 indefinite and susceptible of widely different construction. 
 No writer has since maintained or even insinuated that 
 the word was placed there by either party designedly or 
 for any ulterior purpose. 
 
 It was without doubt, purely and simply, a case of 
 careless and inconsiderate use of language. It should 
 be observed that this word was not used in these treaties 
 except in the sense of dividing rivers, and that in the 
 early grants the intention of making the St. Lawrence 
 River the northerly boundary of Maine seemed to be 
 apparent. 
 
 This was the position taken by the American commis 
 sioners before the King of the Netherlands, and it was 
 furthermore contended by them that, taking the whole 
 article together, the word "Highlands" as therein 
 expressed, referred to an unexplored country and was 
 applicable to any ground, whatever might be its nature 
 or elevation, along which the line dividing the rivers 
 
[19] 
 
 should be found to pass; and that the fact that the 
 ground dividing rivers was necessarily more elevated than 
 those rivers and their banks, was sufficient to entitle it 
 to the designation of "Highlands" in relation to those 
 rivers. 
 
 The United States claimed that a line from the source 
 of the river St. Croix "directly north" reaches a ridge 
 or "Highland" which divides tributary streams of the 
 St. John River, which falls into the Bay of Fundy, from 
 the waters of the Ristigouche River, which falls through 
 the Bay des Chaleurs, into the Gulf of St. Lawrence; 
 that this line crosses no other rivers for a distance 
 exceeding ninety miles, but tributary streams of the 
 St. John and that river itself. And furthermore that 
 it was not necessary to find any continuous range of 
 mountains, but continuous land which divided these 
 rivers. 
 
 To be exact I copy the following from Gallatin s notes 
 on the "American line" (page 17) which he compiled 
 from the statements laid before the King of the Nether 
 lands : 
 
 "At about ninety-seven miles from the source of the 
 River St. Croix, the due north line reaches a ridge or 
 Highland which divides tributary streams of the River 
 St. John, which falls into the Bay of Fundy, from the 
 waters of the River Ristigouche, which falls through the 
 Bay des Chaleurs, into the Gulf of St. Lawrence. And, 
 in its further north course, the said line, after crossing 
 several upper branches of the River Ristigouche, reaches, 
 at the distance of about 140 miles from the source of 
 the River St. Croix the Highlands, which divide the 
 waters of the said River Ristigouche from the tributary 
 streams of the River Metis, which falls into the River 
 St. Lawrence. It is clear that there is no other possible 
 choice but between those two places, and that the north- 
 
[20] 
 
 west angle of Nova Scotia must, of necessity, be found 
 at the intersection of the said due north line with, either 
 the Highlands which divide the waters of the River St. 
 John from those of the River Ristigouche, or the High 
 lands which divide the waters of the River Ristigouche 
 from those of the River Metis ; since there is no other 
 point, through the whole course of the due north line, 
 which divides any other waters but such as empty them 
 selves into the same river. 
 
 "The selection between those two dividing Highlands 
 evidently depends on what is meant, according to the 
 treaty of 1783, by rivers that empty themselves or fall 
 into the River St. Lawrence, and by rivers which fall 
 into the Atlantic Ocean. 
 
 "The treaty recognizes but two classes of rivers. The 
 first class embraces only the rivers falling into a river, 
 designated by its specific name, and cannot be construed 
 to include any rivers that do not empty themselves into 
 the river thus specially designated. All the rivers, met 
 by the due north line, which do not actually empty 
 themselves into the River St. Lawrence, according to its 
 known limits, are, by the treaty, considered as falling 
 into the Atlantic Ocean." 
 
 The British theory from first to last was that "High 
 lands" represented a mountainous or hilly country or 
 district. 
 
 They would not admit its American significance as a 
 continuous line dividing rivers regardless of whether such 
 line was mountainous or not. 
 
 There may have been some reason for this as they had 
 been familiar with the term as applied to a region of 
 Highlands in Scotland which distinguished it from the 
 Lowlands, Etc. 
 
 Their writers from time immemorial had thus described 
 sections which were of high elevation and had not gener- 
 
[21] 
 
 ally used the worpl in the American sense as a dividing 
 line, a ridge or a range. 
 
 In the same notes (page 18) Mr. Gallatin says: 
 
 "It is denied on the part of Great Britain, that the 
 boundary thus claimed by the United States, is that 
 which is prescribed or intended by the treaty principally, 
 if not exclusively, on two grounds: 
 
 "1st. That the Bay of Fundy, as mentioned in the 
 treaty of 1783, is, (as well as the Gulf of St. Law 
 rence,) intended to be separate and distinct from the 
 Atlantic Ocean; and that the River St. John, which 
 falls into the Bay of Fundy, (as well as the River 
 Ristigouche which, through the Bay des Chaleurs, falls 
 into the Gulf of St. Lawrence,) is intended, on that as 
 well as on separate grounds, to be excepted from that 
 class of rivers which are described in the treaty as falling 
 into the Atlantic Ocean. 
 
 "Sndly. That the ground over which the boundary 
 line claimed by the United States does pass, has neither 
 the mountainous character, nor the continuous elevation 
 necessary to entitle it to the designation of High 
 lands, as intended by the treaty; and therefore, that 
 the Highlands, claimed on the part of the United States, 
 conform neither in position or character, to the conditions 
 imposed on them by the treaty. 
 
 "From those premises, and with reference particularly 
 to the assertion, that the River St. John must be 
 excepted from that class of rivers described in the treaty 
 as falling into the Atlantic Ocean, it is inferred, on the 
 part of Great Britain, that, consequently the Highlands 
 described in the treaty must lie to the southward of that 
 River. And it is further affirmed, that the Highlands, 
 claimed, on the part of Great Britain, as those desig 
 nated in the treaty of 1783, conform, in every particu 
 lar, to the conditions imposed on them by that treaty." 
 
[22] 
 
 The north line would terminate at Mars Hill as the 
 British construed the treaty, while under the American 
 construction it would run as far north as the sources of 
 the Ristigouche River, which empties into the Bay des 
 Chaleurs. 
 
 The St. John River was midway between the two 
 lines, or in about the central part of the disputed terri 
 tory. 
 
 Had the British claim prevailed, all of what is now 
 Aroostook County, north of Mars Hill, and the most of 
 what is now Piscataquis County, northerly of the Penob- 
 scot waters, would be a part of Canada; and if the 
 Americans had finally been sustained in all that they con 
 tended for, the rich St. John River valley and a large 
 stretch of territory northerly, easterly and northwesterly 
 would now be a part of the State of Maine. 
 
 For the purpose of this sketch it is not necessary to 
 consider the numerous subjects which were involved when 
 the case was tried out before the arbiter. Thirty or 
 more maps published in London subsequent to the proc 
 lamation of 1763, were among the exhibits placed before 
 him by the United States, eighteen of which were pub 
 lished before the treaty of 1783. 
 
 The English made the point that the negotiators of 
 the treaty of 1783 had no evidence before them of the 
 actual geography of the country, and hence the words of 
 the treaty were not effectual, and yet these last-named 
 eighteen maps all made plain the situation of the basin 
 of the St. John, the sources of the Penobscot, which 
 were rivers and streams falling into the Atlantic, and 
 those of the tributary streams of the St. Lawrence. 
 
 The negotiators of that treaty had access to these 
 maps and made use of them, consequently the Americans 
 contended that the highland or ridge of land which 
 divided these tributary streams, was the "Highlands" 
 
[23] 
 
 described in the treaty, and that it constituted a well- 
 defined boundary line which could be found upon the face 
 of the earth, and that there was no reason whatever for 
 assuming that when those words were mutually written 
 into the treaty their significance and meaning were 
 not fully understood. 
 
 It would seem that the gist of the entire issue before 
 the King of the Netherlands was, what were the inten 
 tions of the negotiators of the treaty of 1783, and it is 
 difficult to perceive just how any acts of jurisdiction 
 subsequently exercised by either party over the contested 
 territory, could have thrown any light on these inten 
 tions or affected in any manner the terms of the treaty. 
 
 And yet both sides were allowed to and did present 
 evidence of this nature, some of which is interesting even 
 though its materiality at that time may be doubted. 
 
 It appeared that in the year 1784, a native Indian 
 was tried and convicted by a court of the Province of 
 Quebec, and accordingly executed for a murder com 
 mitted, as was suggested, on the waters of the river St. 
 John; that between the years, 1789 and 1791, two suits 
 were instituted and judgment obtained, before the courts 
 of Quebec by some inhabitants of Canada against persons 
 residing on the river Madawaska ; that an extract from 
 a list of the parishes in the Province of Quebec, taken 
 from the minutes of the Executive Council for 1791, 
 includes that of Madawaska,* and that, in the year 
 
 *A part of the disputed territory was during the entire contro 
 versy over the North Eastern Boundary, known as Madawaska. 
 Upon a part of this is now situated the town of Madawaska in the 
 State of Maine. This territory was anciently called the Fief of 
 Madawaska; the original concession of it having been made by the 
 Government of Canada to the children of the Sieur Charles Auburt 
 de la Chenaye, November 25, 1683. This concession contained the 
 following condition: 
 
 "Subject to the Foi et hommage, which the grantees, their heirs 
 
[24] 
 
 1785, that council issued an order for opening a road 
 from , Kamarouska on the river St. Lawrence to Lake 
 Temisquata, which lies on the southeastern side of the 
 dividing Highlands, claimed as their boundary by the 
 United States. 
 
 Seldom has an international question been so thor 
 oughly discussed as was that of this disputed boundary. * 
 
 and assigns, shall he holden to render at the Castle of St. Louis of 
 Quebec of which they are to hold, and subject to the customary 
 rights and dues in conformity with the Contume de Paris." 
 
 By an adjudication of the Prevotal Court of Quebec, dated Octo 
 ber 29th, 1709, this Seigniory of Madawaska was seized by virtue of 
 a sentence of that court and was sold to Joseph Blondeau dit la 
 Franchise as the highest bidder at a public judicial sale for the sum 
 of 1,300 livres, and was accordingly adjudged to the said Joseph 
 Blondeau. 
 
 On the 15th day of February, 1723, it appears, by some kind of a 
 judicial proceeding or report, that "on the Fief of Madawaska there 
 was a domain, on which the buildings had been burnt by the 
 Indians, and that there were six arpens of land cleared, but at that 
 time no settlement." 
 
 By an adjudication by the Prevotal Court of Quebec, dated July 
 29th, 1755, founded on what was called a "voluntary judicial sale," 
 Madawaska passed to Pierre Claverie. After Canada became a part 
 of the dominion of Great Britain by conquest, the title to this terri 
 tory passed by judicial sale to Richard Murray and on August 2, 
 1768, by deed of assignment by Richard Murray to Malcolm Fraser. 
 
 The latest deed of Madawaska under these titles that we have evi 
 dence of was dated August 2, 1802, but between this and the last 
 named date there had been several transfers by judicial sale and 
 otherwise. 
 
 This chain of titles was introduced before the King of the Nether 
 lands, by the British commissioners, to show continuous possession 
 and ownership by Great Britain to Madawaska. The reply of the 
 United States to this contention was, that since the conquest no one 
 had performed acts of fealty and homage under the condition of 
 the original concession of 1683, and hence the title had been for 
 feited and abandoned by reason of the failure to comply with these 
 feudal services. 
 
 (Appendix to the first British Statement before the King of the 
 Netherlands.) 
 
 ""History and Digest of International Arbitrations, Vol. I, p. 91. 
 
[25] 
 
 Gallatin asserted that he devoted nearly two years in 
 studying and preparing the case, and bestowed on it 
 more time than he ever did on any other question. * 
 
 Finally on the 10th day of January, 1831, the deci 
 sion of the King of the Netherlands was made public 
 and it was a surprise to both governments and to all 
 parties of interest. 
 
 When his award was analyzed, it was found that he 
 had sustained in words the American contention that the 
 term "Highlands" was applicable to ground which, with 
 out being mountainous or hilly, divided rivers, flowing in 
 the opposite directions ; but that it was not shown that 
 the boundaries described in the treaty of 1783 coincided 
 with the ancient limits of the British provinces; and 
 that neither the line of Highlands claimed by Great 
 Britain so nearly answered the requirements of the treaty 
 of 1783 in respect to division of rivers as to give prefer 
 ence one over the other. 
 
 Abandoning therefore the attempt to determine this 
 part of the boundary according to the treaty of 1783, 
 he recommended what was termed a line of "conven 
 ience" t or in other words, he made an arbitrary line, 
 not found in Mitchell s map, Map A, or in any of the 
 maps used by the negotiators of the treaty of 1783, of 
 the treaty of Ghent, or by either party before him. 
 
 It was evidently intended by him as a compromise, 
 pure and simple. 
 
 On the 12th day of January, 1831, Mr. Preble, 
 who was then envoy-extraordinary of the United States 
 at The Hague, addressed to the British Minister of 
 Foreign Affairs, a note, respectfully protesting against 
 the award and reserving the rights and interests of the 
 
 * Adams Writings of Gallatin, Vol. II, p. 549. 
 
 tHistory and Digest of International Arbitrations, Vol. I, p. 136. 
 
[26] 
 
 United States on the ground that the proceedings of the 
 arbitrator constituted a departure from his powers. 
 
 Mr. Preble also took the ground that the object of 
 the arbitration was to have executed the terms of the 
 treaty of 1783 and that if this could not be done, the 
 question of boundaries ought never again be submitted 
 to any sovereign. And he thus formally entered his 
 protest against the proceedings. 
 
 The British government, while apparently not satis 
 fied with the award, expressed its acquiescence in it, but 
 authorized its minister privately to intimate to the 
 United States that it would not consider the formal 
 acceptance of the award as precluding modifications of 
 the line by mutual exchange and consideration. 
 
 The government at Washington for a time hesitated 
 as to what course to pursue. Mr. Treble s protest had 
 been entered without instructions from his government 
 and President Jackson was at first inclined to accept the 
 award. 
 
 As the action of the King of the Netherlands became 
 more fully understood by the people of Maine and 
 Massachusetts, its discussion by newspapers and public 
 men became bitter and its criticism more and more 
 intense; and the President s political enemies in both 
 states were severely blaming him for his procrastination 
 in the matter. 
 
 At one time he was disposed to issue a proclamation, 
 accepting of the terms of the award without consulting 
 the Senate, but was driven from this course by his politi 
 cal friends in Maine, who represented to him that such 
 a course would change the politics of the State.* 
 
 It is said that he regretted in after years that he did 
 
 *Webster s Works, Vol. 1, p. 119. 
 
[27] 
 
 not follow out his own inclinations in regard to the 
 subject.* 
 
 President Jackson therefore submitted the question of 
 acceptance or rejection to the Senate on the 7th day 
 of December, 1831, and in June, 1832, the award was 
 rejected by a vote of 35 to 8, and the Senate at the 
 same time advised the President to open a new negotia 
 tion with Great Britain for the ascertainment of the line. 
 
 The British government promised to enter upon the 
 negotiations in a friendly spirit; and it was stipulated 
 and agreed that both sides should refrain from exercising 
 any jurisdiction beyond the boundaries which they actu 
 ally possessed. 
 
 Meanwhile the government of the United States made 
 earnest though unsuccessful attempts to obtain from the 
 State of Maine full authority to adjust the matter with 
 Great Britain. 
 
 The proposition was for Maine to provisionally sur 
 render to the Federal government all of her right to the 
 disputed territory for the purpose of a settlement. 
 
 These offers were, however, all rejected by the State 
 of Maine and then the British government formally with 
 drew its offer to accept the compromise recommended by 
 the King of the Netherlands. 
 
 No real progress was made and nothing accomplished 
 towards a settlement of the controversy during the 
 remainder of President Jackson s administration. 
 
 President Van Buren sent a message to the Senate 
 March 20, 1838, with recent correspondence about the 
 subject between the Secretary of State, Mr. Forsyth, 
 and the British Minister, Mr. Fox. 
 
 Mr. Forsyth recommended a new conventional line, or 
 another submission to arbitration and the President in 
 
 *Webster s Works, Vol. 1, p. 119. 
 
[28] 
 
 his message expressed the hope that "an early and satis 
 factory adjustment of it could be effected." 
 
 Governor Kent submitted the question to the Legis 
 lature of Maine, which body on the 23d day of March, 
 1888, resolved that it was not expedient to assent to the 
 Federal government s treating for a conventional line, but 
 that the State should insist on the line established by the 
 treaty of 1783, and that the senators and representatives 
 in Congress be requested to urge the passage of a bill 
 then pending for a survey of the boundary. 
 
 In 1839, Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge, 
 employed by the English authorities, surveyed a part of 
 the line and the government at Washington provided 
 for a survey in 1840. 
 
 Nothing of importance resulted from either of these 
 surveys. 
 
 For a decade of years subsequent to the award of the 
 King of the Netherlands it was a theme of vast interest 
 to the people of Maine and of Massachusetts as well. 
 
 The General Court of that commonwealth made vari 
 ous reports regarding it at different times. The Gov 
 ernors of Maine discussed it in their messages and the 
 Legislature made several exhaustive reports upon it. 
 
 Indissolubly interwoven with this controversy is the 
 arrest, imprisonment and punishment of one John Baker, 
 a resident of what was known as the Madawaska Settle 
 ment. 
 
 The rights of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to 
 Madawaska and adjacent lands on the Aroostook River 
 were recognized at an early period after the source of 
 the St. Croix was settled by the convention of 1794. 
 
 Grants were accordingly made by the Legislature of 
 
 Massachusetts of lots of land embracing both branches 
 
 of the Aroostook River* and bordering on the boundary 
 
 *This river was originally known as "Restock" and "Ristook." 
 
[29] 
 
 line, namely : One to the town of Plymouth and one to 
 General Eaton. 
 
 Locations and surveys of these lands were made under 
 authority of Massachusetts. 
 
 Among other grants was that of a lot of land to John 
 Baker "of a plantation called and known by the name 
 of Madawaska Settlement, in the County of Penobscot, 
 and State of Maine," the deed of which was executed 
 jointly by "George W. Coffin, agent for the Common 
 wealth of Massachusetts, and James Irish, agent for the 
 State of Maine," on the third day of October, 1825. 
 Another deed of land situated below Baker s was made 
 to James Bacon. 
 
 Baker had a farm and a small store, and also a grist 
 and sawmill. Other settlers soon became his neighbors 
 and his place was a center and headquarters for the 
 American settlers in that locality. 
 
 One George Morehouse resided in Tobique, in a parish 
 then recently formed and known as Kent. 
 
 He held a magistrate s commission from the Province 
 of New Brunswick, and the first of the Madawaska 
 troubles seem to have arisen from a practice which he 
 had instituted as magistrate, although there is no evi 
 dence that he was in the first instance in any way 
 authorized or instructed by the province authorities to 
 pursue it. 
 
 This was no less a procedure than issuing precepts 
 directed to the constables of the Parish of Kent, for the 
 recovery of small demands against the inhabitants along 
 the Aroostook River. 
 
 Criminal processes against these inhabitants were also 
 occasionally issued by Magistrate Morehouse. 
 
 The serving of these precepts was often resisted by 
 them and sometimes by force. 
 
[30] 
 
 That Baker was a leader among these settlers is true 
 and that he may have advised them to thus resist the 
 officers which he believed had no authority or jurisdiction 
 there, is also undoubtedly a fact. 
 
 Thus the strife between Morehouse and his followers 
 on the one hand, and the American settlers, led by 
 Baker, on the other hand, continually increased until it 
 seemed to have culminated some time in the early fall 
 of 1827 by an incident which now seems more amusing 
 than tragic. 
 
 The Americans had erected a staff, or what might 
 have been known as a liberty pole, although it does 
 not appear that they had any flag, and upon the top of 
 it had attached a rude representation of the American 
 Eagle. 
 
 The Americans had occasional gatherings and festivi 
 ties around this national emblem, which it may be 
 imagined, were more or less convivial, and they sometimes 
 jeered and perhaps annoyed passers-by from the province 
 who acknowledged allegiance to the Sovereign of Eng 
 land. 
 
 When Morehouse learned of this he became enraged 
 and called upon Baker and ordered him to remove it. 
 This Baker refused to do, whereupon Morehouse procured 
 a subpoena from Thomas Wetmore, Esq., attorney- 
 general of New Brunswick, dated September 17, 1827, 
 for his arrest. 
 
 Early in the morning of September 25th, while Baker 
 and his family were asleep, his house was surrounded by 
 an armed force and he was arrested and taken before 
 Magistrate Morehouse,* who committed him to the jail in 
 
 *Report of Charles S. Davies to the Governor of Maine, January 
 31, 1831, p. 29. There may be some doubt however about this 
 statement as the subpoena commanded him to appear before the 
 court in Fredericton. 
 
[31] 
 
 Fredericton without even examination or trial, if the 
 accounts of the transaction published at the time are to 
 be believed. 
 
 But while Morehouse may or may not have been 
 incited by the New Brunswick authorities to do these 
 unlawful acts, they were themselves responsible for some 
 things equally as illegal, among which was that of assess 
 ing and levying a special and wholly illegal tax upon 
 these settlers which was known as the "Alien tax."* 
 
 Baker was prosecuted at various times and one of the 
 alleged grounds for action against him and for several 
 other similar proceedings against Americans in Mada- 
 waska and along the Aroostook River was, that they 
 were trespassers on crown lands. Lumber that had 
 been sawed at Baker s mill was seized and confiscated 
 while being transported down the St. John. 
 
 Magistrate Morehouse seems to have spent consider 
 able time in harassing the settlers on the Aroostook in 
 devious ways. 
 
 Early in the spring of 1827 he assumed to have author 
 ity to prevent them from working on the lands which they 
 occupied, and forbade their doing so, and also posted up 
 written notices to this effect on the Eaton Grant, and 
 in different places; and marked some small piles of tim 
 ber which they had cut, for seizure, t 
 
 He did not even treat them as English subjects but 
 apparently regarded them as outlaws and intruders with 
 out a country, and without rights which anyone was 
 bound to respect. 
 
 In July, 1827, Daniel Craig, a deputy sheriff of the 
 Parish of Kent, who was sent by Morehouse, delivered 
 summonses to all of the inhabitants to appear before the 
 
 *Gov. Lincoln s letter to the Secretary of State of the United 
 States, September 3, 1827. 
 tDavies Report, p. 10. 
 
[32] 
 
 court in Fredericton in pleas of trespass and intrusion 
 on crown lands.* 
 
 This sudden and unexpected proceeding naturally 
 created a state of consternation and alarm. 
 
 The precepts were served only a few days before the 
 court was to convene. Some went to Fredericton only 
 to learn that the cases were delayed until the next winter. 
 Some went part way and then returned home, while many 
 did not heed the summonses at all. 
 
 It was said that those who did go suffered much hard 
 ship as they were far from home without means of suste 
 nance. 
 
 One man, James Armstrong, was seized in the house 
 of his brother, Ferdinand Armstrong, placed in a canoe 
 and forcibly deported beyond the territory, t 
 
 Their market was at Houlton and their only means of 
 transportation was down the St. John River, but as 
 their produce was often seized while en route and as they 
 were subject to so much oppression from the provincial 
 officers, in the fall and winter of 1827-8 they deter 
 mined to cut out a woods road to Houlton which should 
 be wholly on undisputed American soil. 
 
 The first attempt at this was a failure as the explorers 
 who were employed to "spot" out the road, lost their 
 way and after much suffering and privation, found them 
 selves in Foxcroft. J 
 
 It is evident that these American settlers desired to 
 live quiet and peaceful lives, for the means which they 
 resorted to to circumvent provincial authority fully 
 demonstrate this. 
 
 When they had endured the methods and practices of 
 Morehouse and others as long as they felt it was possible, 
 
 * Da vies Report, p. 11. 
 tlb. p. 12. 
 Jib. p. 12. 
 
[38] 
 
 instead of organizing an armed revolt which might have 
 been natural under the circumstances, they conceived the 
 idea of a general agreement to avoid all resort to courts 
 or legal proceedings whatever. 
 
 The plan was simple and yet unique and perhaps in a 
 degree communistic. 
 
 A paper was accordingly drawn up and signed by the 
 American inhabitants generally, constituting a sort of 
 compact, by which they mutually agreed to adjust all 
 disputes of whatever nature which might arise among 
 themselves, by virtue of referees, without admission of 
 British authority, and that they would support each 
 other in abiding by this determination. 
 
 This was to be a provisional agreement, to continue 
 in force only for one year ; and, in the meantime, appli 
 cation was to be made to the government, in order to 
 obtain, if possible, the benefit of some regular authority. * 
 
 Thus these isolated and primitive people in that deso 
 late and remote region, buffeted by the persecutions of 
 one government, and forsaken and abandoned to their 
 own resources by another government, more than half a 
 century after the treaty of 1783, proposed to free them 
 selves from the tyranny of all magistrates, courts, 
 lawyers and officers. 
 
 This paper or written agreement among the inhabi 
 tants of Madawaska, was, as will hereafter appear, one of 
 the grounds for the indictment against Baker and others 
 for alleged conspiracy and sedition. 
 
 The redoubtable Morehouse, as might have been 
 anticipated, appeared upon the scene as soon as he 
 learned of the existence of this written agreement and 
 demanded it of them, but it was in their estimation, too 
 sacred a document to part with, and they refused to 
 
 *Davies Report, p. 23. 
 
[34] 
 
 deliver it up as did the people of Connecticut refuse to 
 surrender their ancient charter to James II in 1687. 
 
 At the Hilary term* of the Supreme Court in 1828, 
 the grand jury for the County of York in the Province 
 of New Brunswick found a true bill of indictment against 
 John Baker, James Bacon and Charles Studson, for 
 conspiracy. 
 
 The defendants, Bacon and Studson, were never taken 
 into custody, but John Baker was arrested and arraigned 
 Thursday, May 8, 1828, before the Honorable Chief 
 Justice Saunders, Mr. Justice Bliss and Mr. Justice 
 Chipman. 
 
 The indictment alleged that the defendants "being 
 persons greatly disaffected to our said lord the now 
 King, and his Government, within this his Majesty s 
 Province of New Brunswick, and being factiously and 
 seditiously disposed, on the fourth day of July in the 
 eighth year of the reign of our said Sovereign Lord 
 George the Fourth, with force and arms, at the parish 
 aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, did amongst them 
 selves, conspire, combine, confederate, and agree together, 
 falsely, maliciously, factiously, and seditiously, and to 
 bring hatred and contempt on our said lord the King, 
 etc, etc." 
 
 The first overt act complained of in this indictment 
 was that on the said fourth day of July at the place 
 above named, the defendants "in pursuance of, and 
 according to said conspiracy," * * * * did "cause 
 to be raised and erected, a certain flag-staff, and did 
 place thereon a certain flag, as the Standard of the 
 United States of America. 
 
 *Hilary Term. In English law. A term of court, beginning on 
 the llth and ending on the 31st of January in each year. Super 
 seded (1875) by Hilary sittings, which begin January llth, and end 
 on the Wednesday before Easter. 
 
[35] 
 
 The second overt act relates to the provisional paper 
 which the inhabitants had signed as above referred to 
 and alleged that the defendants had "applied to divers 
 liege subjects of our said lord the King, and then and 
 there presented to the same subjects a paper writing, 
 which they the said John Baker, James Bacon and 
 Charles Studson, then and there requested the said sub 
 jects to sign, then and there declaring that, by the said 
 paper, they the said subjects, would bind themselves to 
 oppose the execution of the laws of Great Britain, to 
 wit, in the Madawaska settlement, so called. 
 
 The third overt act states that the defendants "did 
 oppose and obstruct the post man" in carrying the mail 
 through Madawaska settlement, etc. 
 
 The attorney general appeared and prosecuted the 
 case for the crown while the defendant Baker appeared 
 without counsel and defended himself during the trial. 
 Baker was found guilty, and sentenced to two months 
 imprisonment, and to pay a fine of 25 to the king. 
 
 Prior to the arrest of Baker he and James Bacon had 
 been selected by the inhabitants as "a deputation" to 
 proceed to the seat of government of Maine with a 
 request to have their case laid before the Legislature at 
 its next session ; and to enquire of the executive authority 
 whether they were recognized as citizens of the State of 
 Maine and entitled to its protection. 
 
 These two men attended to this duty by traveling on 
 foot and by canoe much of the way ; they then returned 
 through the wilderness by the way they came. 
 
 One of the results of their mission was the following 
 proclamation by the Governor of Maine: 
 
 "Whereas it has been made known to this State, that 
 one of its citizens has been conveyed from it, by a 
 Foreign Power, to a gaol in the Province of New Bruns 
 wick ; and that many trespasses have been committed by 
 
[36] 
 
 inhabitants of the same Province upon the sovereignty 
 of Maine and the rights of those she is bound to 
 protect. 
 
 "Be it also known, that, relying on the government 
 and people of the Union, the proper exertion will be 
 applied to obtain reparation and security. 
 
 "Those, therefore, suffering wrong, or threatened 
 with it, and those interested by sympathy, on account 
 of the violation of our territory and immunities, are 
 exhorted to forbearance and peace, so that the prepara 
 tions for preventing the removal of our land marks, and 
 guarding the sacred and inestimable rights of American 
 citizens may not be embarrassed by any unauthorized 
 acts. 
 
 ENOCH LINCOLN. 
 
 Portland, November 9, 1827." 
 
 The Legislature of 1828 also passed this resolve: 
 "Whereas the sovereignty of this State has been 
 repeatedly violated by the acts of the agents and officers 
 of the Government of the British Province of New 
 Brunswick, and that government, by its agents and 
 officers, has wantonly and injuriously harassed the citi 
 zens of this State, residing on the North Eastern frontier 
 of the same, and within its limits, by assuming to exer 
 cise jurisdiction over them, in issuing and executing civil 
 and criminal process against them, by which their 
 property has been seized, and some of them arrested and 
 conveyed out of the State, and subjected to the opera 
 tion of the laws of that Province; and in establishing 
 military companies within the territory of this State; 
 imposing fines for neglect of military duty ; imposing 
 upon our said citizens an alien tax, and requiring pay 
 ment of the same; and Whereas, by the exercise of the 
 aforesaid unwarranted acts of jurisdiction by the govern- 
 
[37] 
 
 ment of the said Province, some of our citizens have 
 been deprived of their liberty, their property destroyed, 
 many of them driven from their lands and dwellings, 
 the tranquility and peace of all of them disturbed, and 
 the settlement and population of that part of the State 
 adjoining said Province, greatly retarded, if not wholly 
 prevented : Therefore, 
 
 "RESOLVED, That the present is a crisis, in which 
 the government and people of this State, have good 
 cause to look to the government of the United States 
 for defence and protection against foreign aggression. 
 
 "RESOLVED FURTHER, That if new aggressions 
 shall be made by the government of the Province of 
 New-Brunswick upon the territory of this State, and 
 upon its citizens, and seasonable protection shall not be 
 given by the L^nited States, the Governor be, and he 
 hereby is requested to use all proper and constitutional 
 means in his power, to protect and defend the citizens 
 aforesaid in the enjoyment of their rights. 
 
 "RESOLVED FURTHER, That, in the opinion of 
 this Legislature, the Executive of the United States 
 ought, without delay, to demand of the British Govern 
 ment the immediate restoration of John Baker, a citizen 
 of this State, who has been seized by the officers of the 
 Province of New Brunswick, within the territory of the 
 State of Maine, and by them conveyed to Fredericton, 
 in said Province, where he is now confined in prison ; and 
 to take such measures as will effect his early release. 
 
 "RESOLVED FURTHER, That the Governor be, 
 and he hereby is, authorized and requested, with the 
 advice and consent of Council, from time to time, to 
 extend to the family of the said John Baker, such relief 
 as shall be deemed necessary ; and he is hereby author 
 ized to draw his warrant on the Treasury for such sum 
 or sums as shall be required for that purpose. 
 
[38] 
 
 In the House of Representatives, Feb. 16, 1828. 
 Read and passed, 
 
 JOHN RUGGLES, Speaker. 
 Attest, James L. Child, Clerk. 
 
 In Senate, February 18, 1828, 
 
 Read and passed, 
 
 ROBERT P. DUNLAP, President. 
 Attest, Ebenezer Hutchinson, Sec y. 
 
 February 18, 1828 Approved, 
 
 ENOCH LINCOLN." 
 
 In 1831 the attempt of certain persons to hold an 
 election at Madawaska Settlement under the laws of 
 Maine, led to their arrest and trial by the authorities of 
 New Brunswick. 
 
 They were convicted and sentenced to fine and impris 
 onment, but were afterwards released on the request of 
 the United States government, their action having been 
 disavowed by the authorities of Maine. 
 
 In June, 1837, Ebenezer Greeley of Dover, Maine, 
 was employed by the State of Maine as an agent to take 
 the census of the people of Madawaska, and at the same 
 time, to distribute their share of the surplus money 
 which had accumulated in the United States Treasury. * 
 
 A provincial constable arrested Mr. Greeley and car 
 ried him as a prisoner to Fredericton, N. B. 
 
 But while the Fredericton officials had for some time 
 unhesitatingly imprisoned humble and uninfluential citi 
 zens of Maine when brought to them in custody, they 
 were alarmed at this bold procedure. The sheriff there 
 feared to detain in gaol an agent or officer of the State 
 of Maine while in the discharge of his duties, and 
 refused to receive the prisoner. After being liberated, 
 
 * Abbot s History of Maine, p. 431. 
 
[39] 
 
 Mr. Greeley returned to the Aroostook and resumed his 
 labors as census taker. 
 
 In a short time after this, however, Governor Harvey 
 of New Brunswick, hearing that Mr. Greeley was distrib 
 uting money to the people,* assumed, without making 
 any attempt to obtain evidence of the facts, that it was 
 done as a bribe to induce the inhabitants to continue 
 their allegiance to the United States. 
 
 He therefore ordered Mr. Greeley to be rearrested, 
 and he was lodged in Fredericton jail.t 
 
 Governor Dunlap of Maine issued a general order 
 announcing that the soil of the State had been invaded 
 by a foreign power and the militia was called upon to 
 hold itself in readiness for momentary and active service. 
 
 A few weeks later, the British authorities, influenced 
 by a message from President Van Buren, again liberated 
 Mr. Greeley, who once more returned to the turbulent 
 Aroostook and remained there until he had completed 
 his services. J 
 
 That the people of the new State of Maine were 
 actuated by a spirit of patriotism, in vigorously oppos 
 ing the encroachment of the officials of the Province of 
 New Brunswick, upon what they believed to be their terri 
 tory ; that the feeling, when the District of Maine was 
 separated from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in 
 1820, and admitted into the Union of States, was intense 
 and increased year by year, as they saw what they deemed 
 to be their unquestioned rights, trampled upon by the 
 
 *This was the famous "distribution of the surplus" under 
 Pres. Jackson which was one of the most notable events of his 
 administration. 
 
 t Abbot s History of Maine, p. 431. 
 
 +Mr. Greeley was released "without trial or explanation and 
 returned to his home." (Message of Gov. Kent, 1839.) 
 
[40] 
 
 province, supported and protected by Great Britain, was 
 bitter and uncompromising, is true. 
 
 William King, the first Governor of Maine, in his 
 message to the Legislature, June 2, 1820, refers to the 
 importance of the North Eastern Boundary question, to 
 both Maine and Massachusetts. 
 
 Governor Paris, in 1822, expressed "great anxiety," 
 because of the disagreement of the commissioners, under 
 the treaty of Ghent, "in relation to the true boundary, 
 between the United States and the British Provinces," 
 and he again referred to it in his message, in 1824. 
 
 In 1825, he also called attention to it, and to the fact 
 6 that depredations, to a very considerable extent, have 
 been committed on our timber lands, lying on the Aroos- 
 took and Mawascah and other streams," and that "these 
 depredations were committed by British Subjects." 
 
 And in 1826, a considerable part of his annual mes 
 sage is devoted to this subject. 
 
 On January 17, 1826, the Joint Standing Committee 
 on State Lands, made a report to the Legislature, rela 
 tive to the boundary question accompanied by the follow 
 ing resolve, which received a passage : 
 
 "Resolved, That the Governor, for the time being, 
 be authorized and requested to take such measures as he 
 may think expedient and effectual, to procure for the 
 use of the State, copies of all such maps, documents, 
 publications, papers and surveys, relating to the North 
 Eastern Boundary of the United States, described in the 
 treaty of 1783, and such other information on that sub 
 ject, as he may deem necessary and useful for this State 
 to be possessed of; and that the sum of five hundred 
 dollars be appropriated to carry into effect the provisions 
 of this Resolve ; and that the Governor be authorized to 
 draw his warrants on the treasury for the same, as occa- 
 
[41] 
 
 sion, from time to time, may require, he to be accounta 
 ble for the same. 
 
 "Resolved, That the Governor of this State, in con 
 junction with the Governor of the Commonwealth of 
 Massachusetts, (provided said Commonwealth shall con 
 cur in the measure,) be authorized to cause the Eastern 
 and Northern lines of the State of Maine to be 
 explored, and the monuments, upon those lines, men 
 tioned in the treaty of 1783, to be ascertained in such 
 manner as may be deemed most expedient." 
 
 In 1829, Gov. Lincoln said in his message, "that the 
 decision of the dispute, as to our North Eastern 
 Boundary, is referred to the King of the Netherlands, 
 and while I submit that no reference in such a case, was 
 warrantable, yet there seems to be no objection to the 
 personage selected, for how can he, the subject of 
 impartial history, and not apparently dependent on any 
 advantage from either party, being an umpire between 
 nations, act but as the magnanimous dispenser of justice, 
 who has the power to achieve the most glorious victory 
 by the suppression of the most extreme error?" 
 
 When the Legislature of Maine convened, in 1831, 
 the King of the Netherlands had rendered his decision. 
 
 An official communication from President YaiLJBtwen 
 to Governor Smith, together with a translation of the 
 full text of the award, was transmitted to the Legisla 
 ture, with a special message by the Governor, who had 
 also devoted a considerable portion of his annual mes 
 sage to the matter. 
 
 A joint select committee was appointed by the Legis 
 lature to consider the whole subject, who submitted an 
 elaborate and exhaustive report, full of indignation at 
 the findings of the arbitrator, signed by its chairman, 
 John G. Deane. 
 
[42] 
 
 It not only attacked the impartiality of the arbitrator, 
 but strongly intimated, that he was not in fact, a sover 
 eign, within the true meaning of the convention, which 
 clothed him with the power and authority to act. 
 
 These resolutions closed as follows : 
 
 "Whereas, By the convention of September, 1827, 
 an independent sovereign was to be selected by the gov 
 ernments of the United States and Great Britain, to 
 arbitrate and settle such disputes as had arisen, and the 
 King of the Netherlands was pursuant to that convention 
 selected the arbiter, while an independent sovereign, in 
 the plentitude of his power, exercising dominion and 
 authority over more than 6,000,000 of subjects: 
 
 "And Whereas, By the force of the prevalence of 
 liberal opinions in Belgium, the Belgians overthrew his 
 power and deprived him of more than half of his 
 dominions and reduced him to the former dominions of 
 the Stadtholder, leaving him with the empty title of the 
 King of the Netherlands while he is only the King of 
 Holland, and thereby increasing his dependence upon 
 Great Britain for holding his power even in Holland, 
 which from Public appearances, he held from a very 
 doubtful tenure in the affections of the Dutch. 
 
 "And Whereas, The King of the Netherlands had 
 not decided before his Kingdom was dismembered and he 
 consented to the division, and his public character had 
 changed, so that he had ceased to be that public char 
 acter, and occupying that independent station among the 
 sovereigns of Europe contemplated by the convention of 
 September, 1827, and which led to his selection. 
 
 "Therefore Resolved in the opinion of this Legis 
 lature, That the decision of the King of the Nether 
 lands, cannot and ought not to be considered obligatory 
 upon the government of the United States, either on the 
 principles of right and justice, or of honor. 
 
[43] 
 
 "Resolved Further for the reasons before stated, 
 That no decision made by any umpire under any circum 
 stances, if the decision dismembers a state, has or can 
 have, any constitutional force or obligation upon the 
 State thus dismembered unless the State adopt and sanc 
 tion the decision. 
 
 At the session of the Legislature of 1831, an act was 
 passed to incorporate the town of Madawaska, including 
 territory southward of the river St. John, and the dis 
 puted territory northward* of that river. 
 
 In 1832, Governor Smith, in his annual message said: 
 
 "In the month of October last, information was 
 received that a number of the inhabitants of Madawaska 
 had organized themselves into a corporation, chosen 
 municipal officers, and subsequently a representative ; 
 and that in consequence of these acts, the lieutenant- 
 governor and other authorities of New Brunswick, accom 
 panied with a military force, had proceeded to Mada 
 waska, and arrested a number of American citizens, who 
 were carried to Fredericton, and there imprisoned. 
 
 "Though the measures adopted by the inhabitants, 
 voluntarily organizing themselves into a corporation at 
 that place, then claimed to be under the actual juris 
 diction of the Province of New Brunswick, were unex 
 pected by me, and undertaken without my knowledge; 
 yet, as they acted in territory known to be within the 
 limits of Maine, and in obedience to the laws and con 
 stitution, I considered that they were entitled to the aid 
 and protection of their government. 
 
 "Immediately, therefore, on receiving evidence of 
 these transactions, they were communicated, together 
 with all the circumstances in relation to them within my 
 knowledge, to the Department of State of the United 
 
 *Now Upper Madawaska in the Province of New Brunswick. 
 
[44] 
 
 States, with a request that the proper measures might 
 be adopted by the General Government to procure the 
 release of our citizens, and to protect the territory of 
 our State from invasion. Upon the receipt of this com 
 munication, though the proceedings of the inhabitants 
 of Madawaska were considered to be a breach of the 
 arrangement made with the British Minister, for preserv 
 ing the state of things as it then existed on both sides, 
 till a final disposition of the question, those measures 
 were promptly adopted by the President, which resulted 
 in the release of our citizens from imprisonment, and 
 rendered further proceedings on the part of this State, 
 in reference to that obj ect, unnecessary. 
 
 A special committee was appointed, to which was 
 referred that part of Governor Smith s v message that re 
 lated to the North Eastern Boundary. Among its 
 members appear the names of Reuel Williams and Nathan 
 Clifford. They submitted the following resolves: 
 
 "Resolved, That the Constitution of the United 
 States does not invest the General Government with 
 unlimited and absolute powers, but confers only a special 
 and modified sovereignty, without authority to cede to 
 a foreign power any portion of territory belonging to a 
 State, without its consent. 
 
 "Resolved, That if there is any attribute of State 
 Sovereignty which is unqualified and undeniable, it is the 
 right of jurisdiction to the utmost limits of State Terri 
 tory; and if a single obligation under the constitution 
 rests upon the Confederacy, it is to guarantee the integ 
 rity of this territory to the quiet and undisturbed enjoy 
 ment of the States. 
 
 "Resolved, That the doings of the King of Holland, 
 on the subject of the boundary between the United 
 States and Great Britain, are not a decision of the 
 question submitted to the King of the Netherlands; and 
 
[45] 
 
 that his recommendation of a suitable or convenient line 
 of boundary is not obligatory upon the parties to the 
 submission. 
 
 "Resolved, That this State protests against the 
 adoption, by the Government of the United States, of 
 the line of boundary recommended by the King of 
 Holland as a suitable boundary between Great Britain 
 and the United States ; inasmuch as it will be a violation 
 of the rights of Maine, rights acknowledged and insisted 
 upon by the General Government, and will be a prece 
 dent which endangers the integrity, as well as the inde 
 pendence, of every State in the Union. 
 
 "Resolved, That while the people of this State are 
 disposed to yield a ready obedience to the Constitution 
 and laws of the United States, they will never consent to 
 surrender any portion of their territory, on the recom 
 mendation of a foreign power. 
 
 "Resolved, That the Governor, with advice of 
 Council, be authorized to appoint a competent agent, 
 whose duty it shall be, as soon as may be, to repair to 
 the City of Washington, and deliver to the President of 
 the United States a copy of the preceding Report and 
 these Resolutions, with a request that he will lay the 
 same before the Senate of the United States ; and also 
 deliver a copy to the Vice President, to each of the 
 Heads of Departments, and to each member of the 
 Senate, and to our Representative in Congress. 
 
 "Resolved, That our Senators in Congress be 
 instructed, and our Representatives requested, to use 
 their best efforts to prevent our State from being dis 
 membered, our territory alienated, and our just rights 
 prostrated, by the adoption of a new line for our North 
 Eastern Boundary, as recommended by the King of 
 Holland. 
 
[46] 
 
 "Resolved, That the agent to be appointed by the 
 Governor and Council, be instructed to cooperate with 
 our Senators and Representatives, in advocating and 
 enforcing the principles advanced, and positions taken, 
 in the foregoing Resolutions, and in supporting all such 
 measures as shall be deemed best calculated to preserve 
 the integrity of our State, and prevent any portion of 
 our territory and citizens from being transferred to a 
 Foreign Power." 
 
 Governor Dunlap, in 1834, notes that this question 
 is still unsettled, but considers that the way "is now open 
 for the ultimate attainment of our rights," inasmuch 
 that the President of the United States had announced 
 as the policy of the national administration, in negoti 
 ations with foreign powers, to "submit to nothing that 
 is wrong." 
 
 In the years 1834, 1835 and 1836 the Governors 
 messages refer to it only as "yet being in an unsettled 
 state," but in 1837, Governor Dunlap regrets that he 
 has "received no information to warrant the opinion 
 that a speedy adjustment is expected," and asserts that 
 4 our soil and our sovereignty have been invaded. 
 
 A joint committee at this session of the Legislature 
 was appointed to investigate and report. John Holmes 
 was its chairman on the part of the House. 
 
 Their report of ten pages was one of the most search 
 ing that had been made, and they submitted the follow 
 ing resolutions : 
 
 "Resolved, That we view with much solicitude the 
 British usurpations and encroachments on the north 
 eastern part of the territory of this State. 
 
 "Resolved, That pretensions so groundless and 
 extravagant indicate a spirit of hostility which we had no 
 reason to expect from a nation with whom we are at 
 peace. 
 
[47] 
 
 "Resolved, That vigilance, resolution, firmness and 
 union on the part of this State, are necessary in this 
 state of the controversy. 
 
 "Resolved, That the Governor be authorized and 
 requested to call on the President of the United States 
 to cause the North Eastern Boundary of this State to be 
 explored and surveyed and monuments erected according 
 to the Treaty of 1783. 
 
 "Resolved, That the cooperation of Massachusetts 
 be requested. 
 
 "Resolved, That our Senators in Congress be 
 instructed, and our Representatives requested to endeavor 
 to obtain a speedy adjustment of the controversy. 
 
 "Resolved, That copies of this report and resolutions 
 be transmitted to the Governor of Massachusetts, the 
 President of the United States, to each of our Senators 
 and Representatives in Congress and other Senators in 
 Congress, and the Governors of the several States. 
 
 When the Legislature of 1838 had assembled, the 
 people of Maine had become exasperated, for since the 
 adjournment of the last Legislature, the depredations 
 and trespasses upon territory that was in dispute, also 
 upon portions of territory to which the title of Maine 
 was practically undisputed, had increased to an alarming 
 degree. 
 
 The province people, evidently fully supported by their 
 officials and the government of Great Britain, had never 
 before been so arrogant, defiant and insolent in extend 
 ing by force and unlawful means, their alleged jurisdic- 
 tional rights, as during the years then drawing to a 
 close. The conditions were acute and the situation 
 serious. 
 
 The Whigs had gained the ascendancy in Maine and 
 had elected Edward Kent, governor. Governor Kent 
 was an able lawyer and a profound jurist, arid was for 
 
[48] 
 
 many years after, one of the ablest, members of the 
 Supreme Court of this State. He had informed himself 
 fully of the complex conditions and had given the whole 
 matter careful consideration, hence, his elaboration of it 
 in his annual message is such a lucid history of the 
 events to that time, and the rights of Maine as viewed 
 from a conservative and judicial standpoint, that copious 
 extracts are herein made from it. Among other things 
 he said: 
 
 "Constitutional Law is the broad and ample shield 
 under which a whole people rest in security and peace. 
 Like the atmosphere in which we move, it presses with 
 immense, but equal and balanced power, to sustain the 
 body politic. It protects the infant in its cradle and the 
 magistrate in the seat of Justice. It gives the conscious 
 ness of security and safety to the unarmed and the peace 
 ful, and is more than bolts and bars in guarding every 
 man s castle his own domestic hearth. The weak fear 
 not the strength of the powerful, and the poor and 
 despised tremble not at the oppressor s frown. To such 
 law every good citizen bows in cheerful submission, and 
 with ready acquiescence, for it is but the embodied 
 expression of his own sovereignty. But when, instead 
 of the law of legislation, we have the law of the strong 
 est, and, instead of judicial and executive administration, 
 the summary inflictions of an infuriated mob, stung to 
 madness by temporary rage, savage, remorseless and irre 
 sponsible, excited by some imagined insult or real injury, 
 or perhaps by the expression of obnoxious and unpopular 
 sentiments we have a state of society at which the 
 boldest may well tremble, and the most ardent despair. 
 ********* 
 
 "It is certainly a remarkable fact, that fifty-five years 
 after the recognition of American independence by 
 Great Britain, and the formal and precise demarkation 
 
[49] 
 
 of our limits, in the treaty of peace, the extent of those 
 limits, and the territory rightfully subject to our juris 
 diction, should be a matter of dispute and difference. 
 I feel it to be my duty, in this my first official act, to 
 call your attention to that vitally important question, 
 the true limits of our State, and to express to you and 
 the people my views of the claim set up by a foreign 
 State to the rightful possession of a large part of our 
 territory. 
 
 "I do not intend to enter into a historical detail, or 
 an elaborate argument to sustain the American claim on 
 our North Eastern Boundary. The whole subject has 
 been for years before the people, and our rights, and the 
 grounds upon which they rest, have been ably main 
 tained, and clearly set forth, in our formal documents 
 and informal discussions. 
 
 "I will not trespass needlessly upon your time and 
 patience by a recapitulation. If there is any meaning 
 in plain language, and any binding force in treaty 
 engagements if recognition and acquiescence for a long 
 series of years on the part of Great Britain in one uni 
 form expression and construction of the boundaries of 
 her Provinces of Canada and Nova Scotia, is of any 
 weight, then the right of Maine to the territory in 
 dispute is as clear and unquestionable as to the spot upon 
 which we now stand. It requires, indeed, the exercise 
 of charity to reconcile the claim now made by Great 
 Britain with her professions of strict integrity and high 
 sense of justice in her dealings with other nations; for it 
 is a claim of very recent origin, growing from an 
 admitted right in us, and proceeding, first, to a request 
 to vary our acknowledged line for an equivalent, and then, 
 upon a denial, to a wavering doubt, and from thence to 
 an absolute claim. 
 
[50] 
 
 "It has required and still requires, all the talents of 
 her statesmen, and skill of her diplomatists, to render 
 that obscure and indefinite, which is clear and unam 
 biguous. I cannot for a moment doubt that if the same 
 question should arise in private life, in relation of the 
 boundaries of two adjacent farms, with the same evidence 
 and the same arguments, it would be decided by any 
 court, in any civilized country, without hesitation or 
 doubt, according to our claim. 
 
 "But Great Britain was anxious for a direct communi 
 cation between her provinces. She sought it first as a 
 favor and a grant. She now demands about one third 
 part of our territory as her right. 
 
 "The pertinacity and apparent earnestness and confi 
 dence with which this claim is urged, in the very face of 
 the treaty, and the facts bearing upon the question, 
 have been increased, I fear, by the probably unexpected 
 forbearance, if not favor, with which they have been 
 received and treated by the American authorities. It 
 can hardly be a matter of surprise that the claim is 
 pressed upon us, when instead of standing upon the 
 treaty plain, definite and capable of execution as it 
 manifestly is our own General Government has volun 
 tarily suggested a variation of that line, certainly in 
 their favor, by running west of the due north line of the 
 treaty, and there to seek the highlands ; thus yielding up 
 the starting point, the northwest angle of Nova Scotia, 
 and throwing the whole matter into uncertainty and con 
 fusion. Fortunately for us, the English negotiators, 
 thinking, probably, that a nation which would yield 
 so much, would probably yield more, declined the 
 proposition, unless other concessions were made. The 
 remarkable adjudication made by the arbiter selected 
 under the treaty, resulting merely in advice, the move 
 ment on the part of Maine, in 1832, in the negotiation 
 
[51] 
 
 to yielding up the territory for an equivalent, the appar 
 ent apathy and indifference of the General Government 
 to the encroaching jurisdiction by New Brunswick, her 
 unopposed establishment of a wardenship over the terri 
 tory the repeated incarceration of the citizens of 
 Maine, for acts done on this her territory, almost with 
 out a murmur of disapprobation or remonstrance, and 
 the delay of the President to run the line as authorized 
 by Congress, have all, I fear, served to strengthen and 
 encourage the claim, which was first put forth with doubt 
 and argued with many misgivings. 
 
 "The commission and arbitration under treaty having 
 failed, and our ultra liberal offers either declined or 
 neglected, the parties are turned back to their rights and 
 their limits under the treaties of 1783 and 1814. 
 
 "But in truth, the only question in dispute, or about 
 which there was any difference between the two govern 
 ments, until since the last war and the last treaty, was 
 to which river was the true St. Croix of the treaty. 
 This being settled, and its head or source fixed, (as it 
 has been) the line is to run due north to the south line 
 of Canada, and the northwest angle of Nova Scotia. 
 That line should be run without delay, as authorized by 
 Congress. 
 
 "We warrant the information and the facts; we wish 
 to examine the heighth of land which divides the waters 
 flowing into the St. Lawrence from those running into 
 the Atlantic, and ascertain its elevation and character. 
 We wish to have our land marks placed on our exterior 
 limits, and maintain our own. 
 
 "We wish to test the truth of the assertion, that 
 there is no northwest angle of Nova Scotia, and no such 
 dividing heighth of land as the treaty contemplates, by 
 a correct and scientific examination on the face of the 
 earth. Surely rights of examination, which are secured 
 
[52] 
 
 to individual claimants, are not to be denied to sovereign 
 States. 
 
 "Our situation in relation to this question, owing to 
 the peculiar nature of our government and institutions, 
 is interesting, viewed either with reference to the foreign 
 power with which we are at issue, or our own General 
 Government. Our right and title, clear and perfect as 
 we believe them to be, are, it must be admitted, subjects 
 of dispute, and the first and great question is, how is 
 this dispute to be settled? The line disputed is the 
 Eastern boundary of the United States and of the State 
 of Maine. The General Government is the only power 
 which by the constitution can treat with a foreign 
 government, or be acknowledged or known by that 
 government, in negotiations. Maine acknowledges the 
 right of the General Government to establish the line, 
 according to the terms of the treaty of 1783, and claims 
 a performance of that duty without delay. But whilst 
 she concedes that power, she insists with equal confidence 
 upon the position, that no variation of the treaty line, 
 no concession of any part of our territory, and no con 
 ventional line can be granted or adopted, without the 
 consent of this State. 
 
 "Whatever territory is included within the line run 
 ning from the northwest angle of Nova Scotia west- 
 wardly along the highlands which divide those rivers that 
 empty themselves into the St. Lawrence, from those 
 which fall into the Atlantic ocean, to the northwestern- 
 most head of the Connecticut river, and the line running 
 directly south from said angle to the established source 
 of the St. Croix, is within the State of Maine. 
 
 If there is a dispute as to the location of that angle, 
 and those lines that question, and that question only, 
 is to be settled by the general government. 
 

 [53] 
 
 "In making this assertion, we do not more distinctly 
 acknowledge a power than claim the performance of a 
 duty. In the first sentence of the Constitution of the 
 United States, one of the important objects in the 
 information of that constitution, as there expressed, is 
 to provide for the common defence, and this duty is 
 afterwards in the same instrument, more specifically 
 pointed out in the provision, that, The United States 
 shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican 
 form of government, and shall protect each of them 
 against invasion. Under that constitution, the exer 
 cise of certain rights was denied to the States; all not 
 expressly taken away were reserved to the States and 
 certain new rights were created. 
 
 "Foremost, and most important, of these newly 
 created State rights, is the right, on the part of each 
 State, to demand the aid of all, by the action of the 
 general government, whenever any foreign power inter 
 feres with the territorial rights of such State. 
 
 "No State is to be left to defend its soil and maintain 
 its just rights single handed and alone, to engage in 
 border skirmishes and partizan warfare, and sustain that 
 warfare at its own expense. 
 
 "It is the duty of a State to claim and assert its 
 rights to jurisdiction, and it is the duty of the general 
 government to protect and maintain them, if just and 
 well founded. The acknowledgement of this State right 
 to protection is particularly important to Maine, 
 environed by foreign territory, and forming a frontier 
 State in the Union. Denied the power to negotiate 
 with foreign governments, or to declare and carry on 
 war in defence of her rights, this State can call, in a 
 strong voice, upon that government to which has been 
 delegated those high powers, for protection in the exer 
 cise of her jurisdictional rights. Perfect unity of pur- 
 
[54] 
 
 pose and frankness in disclosures ought to characterise 
 all intercourse between the State and National Govern 
 ments, on this topic. No course is so well calculated to 
 lead to distrust and embarrassment, and to inspire confi 
 dence in the opposing claimants, as diplomatic evasions 
 and jarring and discordant correspondence. We would 
 use no threats of disunion or resistance. We trust that 
 it will never be necessary for a State to assume a hostile 
 attitude, or threatening language, to enforce practically 
 its claims to protection. 
 
 "But Maine has a right to know, fully and explicitly, 
 the opinion and determination of the general govern 
 ment, and whether she is to be protected, or left to 
 straggle alone and unaided. I see little to hope from 
 the forbearance or action of the British government. 
 Their policy, it is apparent, is to delay a settlement of 
 the question, and to extend their actual jurisdiction over 
 the territory, that it may ripen into a right, or at least in 
 future controversies give them the advantage of pos 
 session. 
 
 "The loose and extremely undefined jurisdiction over 
 the small French Settlement at Madawaska, has been the 
 foundation of a claim to actual jurisdiction, and the 
 establishment of wardenship over the whole territory. 
 In pursuance of this plan and policy, they have seized, 
 at various times, heretofore, American citizens, and 
 thrust them into prison, for alleged offences, and dur 
 ing the past season, the Lieut. Governor of New Bruns 
 wick has visited the territory in person, and received the 
 loyal assurance of such of its inhabitants as were ready 
 to acknowledge their allegiance. A citizen of our State, 
 Ebenezer S. Greeley, now lies imprisoned at Fredericton, 
 seized, as it is said, for exercising power delegated to 
 him under a law of this State. The facts connected 
 
[55] 
 
 with this arrest are unknown to me, and I therefore for 
 bear to comment at this time upon them. 
 
 "If the facts are, that he was so seized, for such a 
 lawful act, the dignity and sovereignty of the State and 
 nation demand his immediate release. 
 
 "I am aware that we are met by the assertion that 
 the parties have agreed to permit the actual j urisdiction 
 to remain, pending the negotiation as it existed before. 
 I have yet seen no evidence that such an agreement was 
 ever formally entered into by the parties. But certainly 
 Maine was no party to such an understanding, and at all 
 events it could never have been intended to be perpetu 
 ally binding, or to extend beyond the termination of the 
 then pending negotiation. That negotiation is ended. 
 The old ground of claim at Mars Hill is abandoned; a 
 new allegation is made that the treaty cannot be exe 
 cuted and must be laid aside. In the meantime this 
 wardenship is established, and the claim to absolute 
 jurisdiction, not merely at Madawaska, but over the 
 whole territory north, is asserted and enforced. 
 
 "If this jurisdiction is to be tolerated and acquiesced 
 in indefinitely, we can easily see why negotiation lags, 
 and two years elapse between a proposition and the 
 reply. They have all they want, and the jurisdiction is 
 claimed by them so absolutely that we cannot send an 
 agent to number the people, and must hesitate before 
 the disputed line can be run, to fix our limits and ascer 
 tain important facts. 
 
 "The first duty of Maine, as it seems to me, is to claim 
 the immediate action of the general government, to 
 move efficiently and decidedly, to bring the controversy 
 to a conclusion. We have had years of negotiation, 
 and we are told that we are apparently no nearer to a 
 termination than at the commencement. Maine has 
 
[56] 
 
 waited with most exemplary patience, until even her 
 large stock is almost exhausted. 
 
 She has no disposition to embarrass the action of the 
 General Government, but she asks that some action be 
 had some movement made with a determined purpose 
 to end the controversy. 
 
 "She cannot quietly submit to have her territory 
 wrested from her, her citizens imprisoned, her territorial 
 jurisdiction annihilated, and her rights lost by the bold 
 and persevering and unopposed claims of a foreign 
 power. She cannot consent to be left alone in the con 
 troversy, or to be left in doubt as to the aid or counte 
 nance she may receive from the authorities of the Union 
 in maintaining her acknowledged rights. She asks the 
 quiet and undisturbed possession of her territory, accord 
 ing to the treaty, and that foreign and intrusive posses 
 sion be put an end to ; and by this claim she will abide. 
 She will do nothing rashly, and indulge in no spirit of 
 nullification ; and it will not be until all hope of settling 
 the vexed question by negotiation, and all requests for 
 other aid are denied or neglected, that she will throw 
 herself entirely upon her own resources, and maintain, 
 unaided and alone, her just rights, in the determined 
 spirit of injured freemen. But those rights must be 
 vindicated and maintained ; and if all appeals for aid and 
 protection are in vain, and her constitutional rights are 
 disregarded, forbearance must cease to be a virtue and, 
 in the language of the lamented Lincoln, Maine may be 
 compelled to deliberate on an alternative which will 
 test the strictness of her principles and the firmness of 
 her temper. The recent movement in Congress by one 
 of our Representatives sustained, as we confidently 
 trust, by his colleagues, gives some encouragement to 
 hope that the day for decisive action is at hand. 
 
 "To you delegated guardians of the people s rights 
 
[57] 
 
 I submit these remarks, and to you I leave the consid 
 eration of this momentous subject, confident that you 
 will not yield to an unjust claim, or jeopardize our 
 rights by delay in asserting them. It is for you to say 
 upon mature reflection, whether, in speaking in the 
 name of Maine, I have exceeded the bounds of prudence, 
 or mistaken the feelings of the people. I confess that 
 my convictions are strong, that Maine has been wronged 
 by a foreign government, and neglected by our own 
 and I do not understand the diplomatic art of softening 
 the expression of unpalatable truths. 
 
 "I can only assure you that I most cheerfully co-op 
 erate in maintaining our rights to protection in the exer 
 cise of our rightful jurisdiction." 
 
 From the time when the King of the Netherlands in 
 1831, rendered his decision until the whole matter came 
 to a crisis in Maine in 1839, the Federal government 
 did not make any decisive move that would be a notice 
 to the world that her frontier in Maine was to be pro 
 tected at all hazards. 
 
 History often repeats itself. Then even more than 
 now the party in power was inclined to consider first of 
 all what effect such action would have upon its political 
 fortunes. 
 
 President Jackson had not acted with his usual vigor 
 and aggressiveness in any attempts to settle this question 
 with England and preserve our rights, maintain our 
 national honor, and protect the rights and honor of a 
 sovereign state against the overt acts of a foreign power. 
 He had disappointed his political friends and lent 
 encouragement to his enemies in both Maine and Massa 
 chusetts. 
 
 President Van Buren took his seat in 1838, and,, 
 although the situation was much more serious than at 
 any time during Jackson s administration, he was equally 
 
[58] 
 
 as inclined to procrastinate if not to vacillate about this 
 subject of such vast importance, as was his predecessor. 
 
 During this period Maine had been ably represented 
 in both houses of Congress. 
 
 In the Senate had been such men as Ether Shepley, 
 Peleg Sprague, John Holmes and Reuel Williams. 
 
 In the lower house had been George Evans, F. O. J. 
 Smith, Gorham Parks, Leonard Jar vis and Virgil D. 
 Paris. It was at this time, 1837-39, that Thomas 
 Davee of Blanchard was a representative. 
 
 The Maine delegation heartily supported by the 
 Massachusetts delegation had been incessant in their 
 efforts to force the administration to action. 
 
 Of their vigilance and faithfulness in this respect and 
 their endeavors to constantly keep this issue a prominent 
 one before the country there can be no doubt. 
 
 And yet eloquent speeches in Congress, convincing 
 passages in Governors messages and exciting reports and 
 resolves of legislative committees, however much they 
 might have aroused public sentiment in Maine, failed of 
 having any salutory effect upon our arrogant neighbors 
 across the border, sustained as they were by the power 
 ful arm of Great Britain, so long as the policy of the 
 national government was a passive one. 
 
 Rather did their magistrates become more defiant in 
 claiming jurisdictional rights over the disputed territory, 
 by issuing civil and criminal processes against the settlers 
 along the Aroostook, Madawaska and upper St. John 
 Rivers, and their officers more bold and domineering, 
 and trespassing on these lands was increasing. 
 
 On the 14th of December, 1838, the land agents of 
 Massachusetts and Maine, appointed George W. Buck- 
 more an agent to proceed to the Fish Rivers, and investi 
 gate the trespassing by New Brunswick parties and pre 
 vent such trespassing if possible. 
 
[59] 
 
 Based upon the report which Buckmore made to the 
 land agent and other similar reports Governor Fairfield, 
 January 23, 1839, submitted to the Legislature a mes 
 sage, in which he asserted that, "By this report it 
 appears that a large number of men, many of them, I 
 am informed, from the British provinces, are trespassing 
 very extensively upon the lands belonging to this State : 
 that, they not only refuse to desist, but defy the power 
 of this government to prevent their cutting timber to 
 any extent they please. 
 
 "Upon the Grand River, it is estimated there are from 
 forty to fifty men at work. On the Green River, from 
 twenty to thirty. 
 
 "On the Fish River, from fifty to seventy-five men 
 with sixteen yoke of oxen and ten pair of horses, and 
 more daily expected to go in. On township H ten men, 
 six oxen and one pair of horses. On the little Mada- 
 waska seventy-five men, with twenty yoke of oxen and 
 ten horses. At the Aroostook Falls fifteen men with 
 six yoke of oxen. 
 
 "The quantity of timber which these trespassers will 
 cut the present winter is estimated in value, by the 
 Land Agent at one hundred thousand dollars. 
 
 And the Governor very pertinently remarked that it 
 was not merely the property that was at stake, but "the 
 character of the State is clearly involved." 
 
 He recommended to the Legislature that the land 
 agent be instructed forthwith to proceed to the place of 
 operation on the Aroostook and Fish Rivers with a suf 
 ficient number of men suitably equipped, to "seize the 
 teams and provisions, break up the camps, and disperse 
 those who are engaged in this work of devastation and 
 pillage. 
 
[60] 
 
 In this report Mr. Buckmore* says: "During my 
 stop at the Madawaska settlement, I was called upon by 
 Francis Rice, and Leonard R. Coombs, Esquires, two of 
 the Magistrates living at Madawaska, to learn my busi 
 ness on the St. John River, which I freely communicated. 
 They said they were authorized by the Governor to arrest 
 all persons attempting to exercise jurisdiction, on the 
 part of the American Government, in the Madawaska 
 settlement, and that they should forward a copy 
 of my instructions to the Governor at Fredericton. 
 
 January 24, 1839, the Legislature passed a resolve 
 instructing and empowering the land agent to carry out 
 the recommendations of the Governor and appropriating 
 ten thousand dollars for the purpose. 
 
 In 1838, the Democrats had defeated Governor Kent, 
 the Whig governor, and were again in power in Maine 
 and had elected John Fairfield, governor, who was 
 inaugurated in 1839. 
 
 He appointed Rufus Mclntire of Parsonsfield, land 
 agent. 
 
 Mr. Mclntire was unquestionably a man of ability and 
 integrity. He was a lawyer and had represented his 
 district in Congress four terms. 
 
 Pursuant to the legislative resolve above referred to 
 Governor Fairfield ordered the land agent to go to the 
 Aroostook and Madawaska country for the purpose of 
 carrying out the provisions of the resolve. 
 
 Mr. Mclntire employed Major Hastings Strickland of 
 Bangor, then sheriff of Penobscot County, to accompany 
 and assist him in this work. 
 
 Consequently an expedition left Bangor during the 
 first week of February, 1839, consisting of the land 
 agent, Major Hastings Strickland, with a large civil 
 
 *Buckmore s report was made to Elijah L. Hamlin, land agent, 
 in 1838. 
 
RlTFUS MclNTIRE 
 
 LAND AGENT or MAINE, 1H3!) 
 
[61] 
 
 posse, Ebenezer Webster and Captain Stover Rines of 
 Orono, and Gustavus G. Cushman of Bangor. 
 
 They proceeded to the mouth of the Little Madawaska 
 River, where they encamped. 
 
 During the night of February 12, the house or camp 
 where Mclntire slept was surrounded by about forty 
 armed men. Mclntire and those with him were awak 
 ened, placed under arrest and ordered to be ready at 
 once to march to Fredericton. Mclntire demanded by 
 what authority they arrested him, and the commander 
 pointing his musket at Mclntire s breast, said, "This is 
 our authority." 
 
 They were taken before a magistrate at Woodstock, 
 who issued a warrant against Land Agent Mclntire, 
 Gustavus G. Cushman and Thomas B. Bartlett of Ban 
 gor, and they were forthwith marched to Fredericton 
 and lodged in jail. 
 
 On Sunday, February 17th, the citizens of Bangor 
 enjoyed the sight of two of the leading men among the 
 province trespassers, Mr. McLaughlin, warden of the 
 public lands in New Brunswick, and Captain Tibbets of 
 the Tobique settlement, being escorted as prisoners 
 through the streets of that city. 
 
 They had been captured by the Maine soldiers a few 
 days before and were taken to Bangor, but unlike the 
 prisoners captured by the British they were not lodged 
 in the Bangor jail, but were lodged in the Bangor House 
 and fared sumptuously.* 
 
 *The Bangor Whig, in speaking of this occurrence, editorially, 
 remarked : 
 
 "It is worthy of remark and remembrance, that our Land Agent, 
 when passing through Woodstock, was greeted with jeers and 
 insults by British Subjects, but when the British Land Agent rode 
 through this city, although there were over a thousand people assem 
 bled in the streets, he was suffered to pass in silence. Not a lip 
 was opened or an insult offered." 
 
[62] 
 
 On March 1, 1839, news was received in Bangor that 
 a regiment of eight hundred Fusileers had arrived in 
 the city of St. John, from Cork, Ireland, and would 
 march forthwith to the disputed territory. Five 
 hundred British Regulars had arrived at Madawaska 
 from the city of Quebec, and eight pieces of cannon 
 had been transported up the St. John River from 
 Fredericton. The people of Maine were kept informed 
 of the doings at the "Seat of War" by special mes 
 sengers, stages and express teams, daily coming into 
 Bangor. The Bangor Whig was published daily, and 
 was one of the most enterprising of the Maine news 
 papers of the day. 
 
 It kept a "war correspondent" at Houlton and had 
 a column or more in every issue for several weeks, giving 
 graphic descriptions of the scenes of "war," of the 
 hardships which were encountered, and of the soldiers 
 tenting on the melting snow-drifts, all the way from 
 Houlton to Madawaska. Some of this correspondence 
 would have done credit to the "stories" of the 
 "yellow" journals of today. 
 
 In one of these letters, published March 7th, the 
 writer says: * "let us give every hireling 
 
 and subject of a monarchy, that grant to territory, 
 which King Harold of yore was willing to give to the 
 Norwegian King seven feet by two." 
 
 The news of that day and the editorials in the papers 
 at the time, were more or less colored by the issues of 
 Maine politics. The Bangor Whig was violently parti 
 san and for a time did not give Governor Fairfield, who 
 was a Democrat, and had been chosen governor over 
 Governor Kent, credit for being either competent or 
 patriotic. But as the public mind became intensified 
 in favor of protecting our border, it changed its course 
 and was soon supporting his official acts as loyally as did 
 
[63] 
 
 The Argus, The Age, or any of the Democratic papers. 
 
 When Sheriff Strickland first went to the Aroostook 
 with his posse, and when Mclntire was taken prisoner 
 by Sir John Harvey s officers, the Whig papers contended 
 that Mclntire* left his camp and troops and went within 
 a mile of the enemy to obtain a feather bed to sleep 
 upon, and was thus seen and captured, and that if he 
 had been content to have reposed upon spruce boughs he 
 would not have fallen into the toils of the enemy. 
 
 Some slurs were also cast upon Hastings Strickland for 
 what they termed his "untimely haste," in escaping from 
 the British officers, intimating that he was cowardly, 
 and retreated very unceremoniously. The facts however 
 were that he was alert enough not to be taken prisoner, 
 as some of his companions were, and perceived at once 
 the necessity for immediate and decisive action on the 
 part of Governor Fairfield and Adjutant General 
 Hodgdon, if Maine s rights were to be protected. Being 
 a man of great energy he went from Madawaska to 
 Augusta as rapidly as relays of swift horses would carry 
 him| for the purpose of prevailing upon the State gov 
 ernment at Augusta to mobilize troops upon the border 
 without further delay. Major Strickland was a man of 
 political sagacity and a leader of influence in the Demo 
 cratic party, and one that Governor Fairfield relied upon 
 for advice and counsel. 
 
 Naturally both political parties tried to make political 
 capital for themselves ; the effect of which was to hinder 
 efficient progress in protecting our frontier. 
 
 The Democrats criticized Governor Kent in 1838, and 
 
 *When Mclntire was imprisoned Governor Fairfield appointed 
 Colonel Charles Jarvis provisional land agent. 
 
 tBangor newspapers stated that Major Strickland did not even 
 stop at his home in Bangor but proceeded directly to Augusta. 
 
[64] 
 
 in turn the Whigs blamed Governor Fairfield whenever 
 it was possible to do so. 
 
 As the "Aroostook War" or the military movement 
 of troops to the frontier was made under Governor Fair- 
 field, the Whigs for many years thereafter, kept up an 
 incessant fire of ridicule against him, and Land Agent 
 Mclntire and Major Strickland. 
 
 In this way it became a false tradition that the latter 
 ran away from a conflict to escape imprisonment. One 
 of the doggerels of the day commenced : 
 
 "Run, Strickland, run! 
 
 Fire, Stover, fire! 
 
 Were the last words of Mclntire." 
 
 In the meantime the situation was becoming more and 
 more inflammatory. It was the subject of discussion and 
 agitation in England as well as America. On the 7th 
 of March, 1839, both Lord Brougham and the Duke of 
 Wellington made speeches regarding it in the House of 
 Lords, calling attention to information which had been 
 received from Canada and New Brunswick to the effect 
 that lawless Yankees were invading and trespassing upon 
 the British soil. 
 
 When the people of Maine received news of the proc 
 lamation of Sir John Harvey, lieutenant-governor of 
 New Brunswick, of February 13, 1839, which was a dec 
 laration of war, and the imprisonment of the land agent, 
 the feeling of indignation was deep and universal. 
 
 The Legislature appropriated eight hundred thousand 
 dollars to be used by the Governor for the protection of 
 the public lands. 
 
 A draft was also ordered for ten thousand three hun 
 dred and forty-three men from the militia to be ready 
 for immediate action. 
 
 General Bachelder was commander of the western 
 division of militia. Many volunteers from Penobscot 
 
[65] 
 
 and Piscataquis Counties and other eastern portions of 
 the State were also enlisted. 
 
 Within a week ten thousand American troops were 
 either in the Aroostook region, or on the march there. 
 
 The national government was at last awake to the 
 seriousness of the situation. Congress passed a bill 
 authorizing the President of the United States to raise 
 fifty thousand troops for the support of Maine, and 
 appropriating ten million dollars to meet the expense if 
 war became unavoidable. 
 
 General Scott was ordered to the scene of action, 
 informing Governor Fairfield that he was "specially 
 charged with maintaining the peace and safety of the 
 entire northern and eastern frontiers. He arrived in 
 Augusta with his staff the fifth of March, 1839, and 
 opened headquarters. 
 
 General Scott was also clothed with full power to act 
 as mediator between the State of Maine and the Province 
 of New Brunswick, and on entering upon negotiations 
 which would if possible end further hostilities. He 
 immediately communicated officially with Governor 
 Fairfield arid Sir John Harvey. 
 
 The result was that on March 23, 1839, Sir John 
 Harvey agreed to the terms of settlement negotiated by 
 General Scott, and on March 25 the same were ratified 
 by Governor Fairfield, who immediately issued orders to 
 recall the troops from the Aroostook and the prisoners 
 on both sides were liberated. 
 
 Thus ended the famous "Aroostook War/ and 
 fortunately for the people of the State and the province 
 it was a bloodless one. It has been derided and scoffed 
 at and regarded as a huge international joke, and often 
 has it been the subject for jest and laughter on the 
 stump, and ever a fertile field for the grotesque wit of 
 newspaper writers. 
 
[66] 
 
 And yet it is an incident in international history, in 
 the history of the nation, and of the State of Maine, 
 that is of supreme importance and interest. 
 
 For years its solution puzzled the wisest of our states 
 men. The people of Maine believed that the territory 
 which they possessed, and to which no one else had any 
 rightful or lawful interest, was being wrongfully and 
 illegally taken from them and that the government at 
 Washington delayed the assertion of our rights unnec 
 essarily, because it feared Great Britain. 
 
 Two expeditions were made to the Aroostook and 
 Madawaska country. The first one as we have seen, was 
 by the land agent, accompanied by Major Strickland 
 as sheriff of Penobscot County, with a posse of men, 
 for the purpose of driving off trespassers upon Maine 
 soil. The second expedition was a military one to repel 
 an invasion of the State, which the lieutenant-governor 
 of New Brunswick, Sir John Harvey, had threatened to 
 make. 
 
 Patriotic sons of the Pine Tree State left their homes 
 and firesides in the most inclement season known to our 
 rigorous climate and marched through the deep snows of 
 a wilderness, two hundred miles, to defend our frontier 
 from foreign invasion, when the Federal government was 
 needlessly procrastinating and turning a deaf ear to the 
 cries of suffering and oppressed pioneers in the upper St. 
 John valley. 
 
 Because the good fortunes of diplomacy triumphed 
 and averted the shedding of blood, is no reason why they 
 are not entitled to a high place in the roll of honor, with 
 all of the other hosts of patriotic defenders of our 
 country, and the protection of her glory and renown. 
 
 In his annual message January 3, 1840, Governor 
 Fairfield in referring to the Resolves of the Legislature, 
 passed in March, 1839, explains the withdrawal of the 
 
[67] 
 
 troops, by saying: "Soon after the adoption of the 
 resolution, I received the written assent of the Lieu 
 tenant Governor of New Brunswick to the following, 
 made to him by Major General Scott, to wit: That it 
 is not the intention of the Lieutenant Governor of Her 
 Britannic Majesty s Province of New Brunswick, under 
 the expected renewal of negotiations between the Cabi 
 nets of London and Washington on the subject of said 
 disputed territory, without renewed instructions to that 
 effect, from his government, to seek to take military 
 possession of that territory, or to seek by military force, 
 to expel the armed civil posse or the troops of Maine. 
 
 Upon the basis of this arrangement the troops were 
 recalled by the Governor, but he kept quite a large force 
 or civil posse there after the withdrawal of the troops, 
 under the direction and control of the land agent. 
 
 But war between the United States and England was 
 averted through friendly diplomacy. What is known as 
 the Webster- Ashburton treaty in American history was 
 its final adjustment. This treaty was negotiated by 
 Daniel Webster and Lord Alexander Baring Ashburton 
 in August, 1842, and subsequently accepted and ratified 
 by both governments. 
 
 The commissioners who represented the State of Maine 
 at the hearings before Webster and Ashburton were 
 Edward Kavanagh, Edward Kent, Wm. P. Preble and 
 John Otis. 
 
 On the part of Massachusetts appeared Abbot 
 Lawrence, John Mills and Charles Allen. 
 
 At this treaty the frontier line between the State of 
 Maine and Canada was settled for all time. 
 
 By it, seven twelfths of the disputed ground, including 
 that part of Madawaska that lies on the southerly side 
 of the St. John River, were given to the United States, 
 and five twelfths of the ground to Great Britain ; but it 
 
[68] 
 
 secured a better military frontier for England, and 
 included heights commanding the St. Lawrence, which 
 the award of the King of the Netherlands had assigned 
 to the Americans. 
 
MA.JOI? HASTINGS STKUKI.AM) 
 SiiKHii i OF PKNOHSCOT ( OTXTV. 1S.SS-J) 
 
DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE 
 
 NORTH EASTERN BOUNDARY 
 
 CONTROVERSY 
 
Documentary History of the North 
 Eastern Boundary Controversy 
 
 (From State Papers, 2nd Sess. 20th Cong. 1828-9, 
 Doc. No. 90.) 
 Report of the trial of John Baker, at the Bar of the 
 
 Supreme Court, on Thursday, the 8th May, 1828, 
 
 for conspiracy. 
 
 In the Hilary term of the Supreme Court, the Grand 
 Jury for the county of York found a true bill of indict 
 ment against John Baker, James Bacon and Charles 
 Studson, for conspiracy. The two defendants, James 
 Bacon and Charles Studson, were not taken ; but the 
 defendant, John Baker, being in custody, was brought 
 to the bar and arraigned, and thereupon pleaded not 
 guilty, at the same time protesting against the proceed 
 ings, and that he was not amenable to the jurisdiction 
 of this court. 
 
 He was afterwards, during the term, admitted to bail, 
 and entered into recognizance, himself in 100, and two 
 sureties in 50 each, for his appearance at the present 
 term, to traverse the indictment, and in the meantime 
 to keep the peace and be of good behavior. 
 
 On Wednesday, the 7th instant, the Attorney General 
 states to the Court, that, having understood the defend 
 ant, John Baker, was in attendance, he should be ready, 
 at the opening of the Court on the next day, to proceed 
 with the trial. One of the bail for the defendant then 
 said that the defendant would appear whenever he was 
 
[72] 
 
 required. Thursday was, therefore, appointed by the 
 Court for the trial. 
 
 Thursday, May 8, 1828. 
 The honorable Chief Justice Saunders, 
 Mr. Justice Bliss, 
 Mr. Justice Chipman, 
 came into court, and took their seats. 
 
 The defendant, John Baker, was called, and appeared, 
 and declared he was ready for his trial : Mr. Attorney 
 General then moved for trial, and the clerk of the crown 
 proceeded to call over the names of the jury. 
 
 Mr. Justice Chipman stated to the defendant that he 
 might challenge any of the jurors for cause, but he 
 declined availing himself of this privilege. 
 
 The following jurors were called, and sworn in the 
 order they appeared: 
 
 Michael Fisher, Joseph Estabrooks, Jr., 
 
 William Miller, John Collins, 
 
 Edward Cambridge, Samuel Curry, 
 
 John Bain, Thomas W. Peters, 
 
 Joseph Sutherland, William S. Esty, 
 
 Donald McLeod, Anthony Stewart. 
 
 The clerk of the crown then read the indictment, 
 which is as follows : 
 
 York, to wit. The jurors for our lord the King, 
 upon their oath, present, that John Baker, late of the 
 parish of Kent, in the county of York, laborer, James 
 Bacon, late of the same place, laborer, and Charles 
 Studson, late of the same place, laborer, being persons 
 greatly disaffected to our said lord the now King, and 
 his government, within this, His Majesty s Province of 
 New Brunswick, and being factiously and seditiously 
 disposed, on the fourth day of July, in the eighth year 
 of the reign of our said sovereign lord George the 
 
[73] 
 
 Fourth, with force and arms, at the parish aforesaid, 
 in the county aforesaid, did, amongst themselves, con 
 spire, combine, confederate, and agree together, falsely, 
 maliciously, factiously, and seditiously, to molest and 
 disturb the peace and common tranquility of this Prov 
 ince, and to bring into hatred and contempt our said 
 lord the King, and his Government, and to create false 
 opinions and suspicions in the subjects of our said lord 
 the King, of and concerning the Government and 
 administration of our said lord the King, and of the 
 royal power and prerogative of our said lord the King 
 within this Province. 
 
 First overt act. And the jurors aforesaid, upon 
 their oath aforesaid, do further present, that the said 
 John Baker, James Bacon, and Charles Studson, after 
 wards, to wit, on the same day and year aforesaid, at 
 the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, in pursu 
 ance of, and according to, the said conspiracy, combina 
 tion, confederacy and agreement, amongst themselves 
 had as aforesaid, did erect, and cause to be raised and 
 erected, a certain flag staff, and did place thereon a cer 
 tain flag, as the standard of the United States of 
 America, and did then and there declare, in the presence 
 and hearing of divers liege subjects of our said lord the 
 King, that the said place on which the same flag staff 
 was so erected was a part of the territory of the said 
 United States, and that they, the said liege subjects, 
 must thereafter, look upon themselves as subjects of the 
 said United States. 
 
 Second overt act. And the jurors aforesaid, upon 
 their oath aforesaid, do further present, that the said 
 John Baker, James Bacon, and Charles Studson, after 
 wards, to wit, on the 15th day of July aforesaid, in the 
 year aforesaid, at the parish aforesaid, in the county 
 aforesaid, in further pursuance of, and according to, the 
 
[74] 
 
 said conspiracy, combination, confederacy and agreement, 
 amongst themselves had as aforesaid, applied to divers 
 liege subjects of our said lord the King, and then and 
 there presented to the same subjects a paper writing, 
 which they, the said John Baker, James Bacon, and 
 Charles Studson, then and there requested the said sub 
 jects to sign, then and there declaring that, by the said 
 paper, they, the said subjects would bind themselves to 
 oppose the execution of the laws of Great Britain, to 
 wit, in the Madawaska settlement, so called. 
 
 Third overt act. And the jurors, aforesaid, upon 
 their oath aforesaid, do further present, that the said 
 John Baker, James Bacon, and Charles Studson, after 
 wards, to wit, on the 18th day of July, in the year 
 aforesaid, in further pursuance of, and according to, the 
 said conspiracy, combination, confederacy and agree 
 ment, amongst themselves had as aforesaid, did oppose 
 and obstruct the postman then and there having the 
 custody and carriage of His Majesty s mail to the 
 Province of Lower Canada, in the prosecution of his 
 journey with the said mail; they, the said John Baker, 
 James Bacon, and Charles Studson, declaring to the said 
 postman that the British Government had no right to 
 send its mails by that route, meaning through that part 
 of the said parish of Kent called the Madawaska settle 
 ment; and that they, the said John Baker, James Bacon, 
 and Charles Studson, had received orders from the Gov 
 ernment of the said United States to stop the carriage 
 of the said mail through the same. 
 
 Fourth overt act. And the jurors aforesaid, upon 
 their oath aforesaid, do further present, that the said 
 John Baker, James Bacon, and Charles Studson, after 
 wards, to wit, on the tenth day of August, in the year 
 aforesaid, at the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, 
 in further pursuance of, and according to, the said con- 
 
[75] 
 
 spiracy, combination, confederacy, and agreement, 
 amongst themselves had as aforesaid, did hoist the flag 
 of the said United States of America on a certain flag 
 staff there erected and placed ; they, the said John Baker, 
 James Bacon, and Charles Studson, then and there 
 declaring, in the presence and hearing of divers subjects 
 of our said lord the King, that they, the said John 
 Baker, James Bacon, and Charles Studson, had so hoisted 
 the same flag, and that they had mutually entered into a 
 written agreement to keep the same flag there, and that 
 nothing but a force superior to their own should take it 
 down ; and further, that they considered, and had a 
 right to consider, themselves then and there on the terri 
 tory of the said United States ; and that they had bound 
 themselves to resist by force the execution of the laws of 
 Great Britain among them there; in very great con 
 tempt of our said lord the King and his laws, to the evil 
 example of all others in the like case offending, and 
 against the peace of our said lord the King, his crown 
 and dignity. 
 
 The Attorney General, who conducted the prosecution, 
 then opened the case to the jury, and stated generally 
 the nature of the offence, and the facts necessary to be 
 proved in order to support the indictment: he then 
 briefly set forth the evidence which he intended to adduce 
 to substantiate the charge; and particularly stated it 
 would be shown that the jurisdiction of this Province 
 had always extended over the part of this country where 
 the offence was committed: that the defendants were 
 acting under no authority whatever; and this was an 
 indictment found by the grand jury in the ordinary 
 exercise of their duties. He desired the jury to dismiss 
 from their mind every thing that they had heard or seen 
 written on this case, and decide on the guilt or innocence 
 of the party by the evidence alone ; and, if they could 
 
[76] 
 
 not conscientiously say he was guilty, to acquit him. 
 Several authorities were then read ; but as the whole case 
 was most fully and ably gone into by the learned judge 
 who charged the jury, and the same view of the law and 
 facts taken by him as by the Attorney General, it is not 
 necessary to go into a full detail of the opening speech. 
 
 Mr. Attorney General then proceeded to call the wit 
 nesses. 
 
 William Feirio, one of the witnesses recognized at 
 the last term, was called but did not appear. 
 
 George Morehouse was the first witness examined: 
 his evidence was as follows : 
 
 I am a Justice of the Peace for the county of York, 
 and reside in the parish of Kent, on the river St. John, 
 about thirty miles below the Grand Falls. The Mada- 
 waska settlers commence a few miles above the Falls, 
 and extend up forty to fifty miles. I have been settled 
 where I now live six years ; but my acquaintance with 
 the Madawaska settlement commenced in the year 1819. 
 At this time the inhabitants were principally French; 
 there were a few American citizens. I cannot say 
 whether defendant was there then ; his brother Nathan 
 was. I do not recollect the defendant s being there 
 until September, 1822: he and the other Americans had 
 formed a lumbering establishment at the head of the 
 Madawaska settlement, on the east side of the river St. 
 John, by the Meriumpticook stream. That part of the 
 country where the French and Americans were has been 
 invariably under the jurisdiction and laws of this Province 
 since I knew it. I have been in the constant habit, as 
 a Magistrate, of sending my writs and warrants there, 
 and no interruption or objection was made to the service 
 of them until last August, until then, it was my belief 
 that all the inhabitants there considered themselves 
 under the jurisdiction of, and subject to, the laws of 
 
[77] 
 
 this Province, both American citizens and French set 
 tlers. 
 
 When I speak of last August, I mean that this was 
 the first intimation I had of any objection being made 
 to the exercise of the jurisdiction of this Province there. 
 That intimation was made by a report or communication 
 from Mr. Rice, that John Baker, the defendant, had 
 been guilty of seditious practices. I forwarded the 
 communication to the Secretary of the Province ; a few 
 days after, about the third of August, I received writ 
 ten instructions from His Majesty s Attorney General to 
 proceed to Madawaska and take depositions, and get a 
 copy of the written paper which it was reported the 
 defendants had handed about for signature. I accord 
 ingly proceeded to Madawaska on the seventh of August, 
 and arrived at the place where Baker s house is situate, 
 and went into the house of James Bacon, and asked him 
 to let me see the paper which had been handed about for 
 signature: he said he had it not. I then requested 
 Bacon to go with me to Baker s to look for the paper; 
 he declined going: I then went towards Baker s house, 
 and met him on his mill dam. The mill dam is made 
 across the river Meriumpticook. I stated to him that 
 it had been reported to Government that he and other 
 American citizens residing there had been guilty of 
 seditious practices ; that I was authorized to make 
 inquiry. I told him it was reported that he had drawn 
 up, and circulated among the settlers, a paper, the 
 purport of which was that they were American citizens, 
 and had bound themselves to resist the execution of the 
 laws of Great Britain : he neither admitted or denied it, 
 but said that he had been charged with an attempt to 
 stop the mail, which was false. I requested him to show 
 me the paper which had been handed round for signa 
 ture: he said he believed it was not in his possession, 
 
[78] 
 
 but did not deny the existence of such a paper : he said 
 he did not know whether it was in his possession or not ; 
 he thought Studson had it. I requested him to go to 
 his house and search his papers ; perhaps he might find 
 it ; we proceeded together towards his house ; between 
 his residence and the mill, there is a new house, where 
 ten or twelve Americans were assembled. I did not know 
 them to be Americans : but supposed them to be so ; they 
 were not French settlers : when we got there, Baker took 
 two or three aside, and consulted with them a few 
 minutes; he then came back, and said to me, "Mr. 
 Morehouse, I have consulted with the committee, and 
 we have determined that you shall not see this paper : 
 we have formerly shown you papers in similar cases, 
 which has been very prejudicial to us." I observed, 
 when I went there, a flag staff erected on the point of 
 land where Baker lives ; the point is formed by the 
 junction of the Meriumpticook river with the St. John ; 
 there was then no flag on it, but after coming out of 
 Bacon s, I observed a flag hoisted a white flag, with an 
 American eagle and semicircle of stars, red. In the 
 conversation I had with Bacon he deprecated Baker s 
 practices, and said he would not desist until he brought 
 the Americans there into trouble. I think the persons 
 Baker took aside to consult with, were Bartlett and 
 Savage. After I had received the answer before men 
 tioned, I pointed to the flag, and asked Baker what that 
 was. He said, "the American flag, Mr. Morehouse: 
 did you never see it before, if not, you can see it now. 
 I asked him who planted it there : he said, 4 he and the 
 other Americans there." Bacon was present at the 
 time: I required him in His Majesty s name to pull it 
 down. He replied, "no, I will not; we have placed it 
 there, and we are determined we will support it, and 
 nothing but a superior force to ourselves shall take it 
 
[79] 
 
 down ; we are on American territory ; Great Britain has 
 no jurisdiction here; what we are doing we will be 
 supported in ; we have a right to be protected, and will 
 be protected, in what we are doing, by our Govern 
 ment." 
 
 He did not produce or exhibit any authority. I then 
 turned to Bacon, and said, "Bacon, you have heard 
 Baker s declaration, do you mean to support him in it?" 
 He said, "of course I do. " I then left him and came 
 away. Baker, about the 1st February, 1825, applied 
 to me, as a Magistrate, for summonses against some of 
 the Madawaska settlers to collect debts. I gave him 
 six summonses against persons all living in the Mada 
 waska settlement : the return made to me was that the 
 debts were paid when the writs were served. 
 
 Baker has a considerable improvement, and raises more 
 or less grain every year. In 1823, I was at the place 
 where he resides. I understood from what passed, that 
 Baker and Bacon both acknowledged they had signed 
 the paper ; they spoke of having bound themselves by a 
 written agreement to resist the laws of England. 
 
 The direct examination having closed, the defendant 
 was informed he might cross-question the witness: he 
 declined doing it, saying, under the circumstances which 
 he stood there, he did not intend asking any questions. 
 
 To questions then put by the Court, the witness 
 stated : 
 
 The Madawaska settlement proper terminates at the 
 Madawaska river ; above the river, there are a few miles 
 interval, with a few scattering houses; the main settle 
 ment then commences about nine miles above the Mada 
 waska, and extends seven or eight miles. The Meri- 
 umpticook is about eighteen miles above the Madawaska. 
 This settlement has formerly gone by the name of Chat- 
 eaugay : Lately it has been called Sainte Emilie by the 
 
[80] 
 
 French settlers in the settlement. I mean distinctly 
 that the upper as well as the lower settlement has been 
 subject to the British laws. It is at the head of the 
 settlement the Americans reside. The whole settlement 
 has gone by the general name of Madawaska Settlement 
 throughout the country; the name Chateaugay caused 
 some difference amongst themselves; the Priest changed 
 it to Sainte Emilie ; there has been no distinction in the 
 actual exercise of jurisdiction between the upper and 
 lower part of this settlement ; the lower bound of the 
 parish of Kent is eighteen miles below my residence. 
 
 Francis Rice sworn. I reside in the Madawaska settle 
 ment, at the head or the first part. I am adjutant of 
 the fourth battalion York county militia: the Mada 
 waska settlers are enrolled in this battalion. I have 
 been in court, and heard Mr. Morehouse s evidence. I 
 made a report to him, as he has stated. I did not know 
 the facts myself; they were reported to me. I accom 
 panied Mr. Morehouse on his visit to the settlement on 
 the 7th August last, and was present at the conversations 
 with Baker and Bacon : the facts all took place as he has 
 stated: I can say nothing more. The Madawaska set 
 tlers attend and turn out at the militia training pretty 
 regularly, both above and below the confluence of the 
 Madawaska. 
 
 The French settlers not being able to speak English 
 distinctly, the witness, Francis Rice, had previously 
 been sworn as interpreter, and acted as such throughout 
 the trial. 
 
 Abraham Chamberlain sworn. I live in the upper 
 part of the Madawaska settlement, above the Mada 
 waska river ; have resided there four years this Summer ; 
 was born at Bay Chaleur; came from there to this 
 Province four years ago and have always lived since in 
 the Madawaska settlement. Charles Studson presented 
 
[81] 
 
 me a paper, I think in July last. I don t remember 
 seeing Baker. Bacon and Emery, and some other 
 Americans, were present. I was passing by ; they were 
 drinking rum; they asked me to take some; I agreed. 
 When they handed the paper, I asked whether any of 
 the French had signed it; they said, not yet. 
 
 The witness being then asked as to the contents of the 
 paper, and the propriety of such evidence being ques 
 tioned by the court, the Attorney General cited the 
 case of Rex versus Hunt and others, 3 Barn, and Aid. 
 566, where it was decided, on an indictment for con 
 spiracy, that secondary evidence of the contents of a 
 paper which was in the defendant s possession was 
 admissible without producing the original, or giving 
 notice to produce it; and that parole evidence of 
 inscriptions and devices on banners and flags is also 
 admissible. The question was then put; but the wit 
 ness could say nothing as to the contents, stating that 
 it was read to him, but, being in English, he did not 
 understand it. They asked him to sign it; but he did 
 not understand for what reason. He wanted to know 
 whether any of the French had signed it. This took 
 place at the point of land near the mill. There was a 
 flag hoisted with an eagle and stars on it ; they did not 
 say anything about having signed the paper themselves. 
 
 Peter Marque sworn. I live in the St. Emilie settle 
 ment, (the upper one.) Bacon and Studson, some time 
 last Summer, tried to make me sign a paper. Studson 
 handed it to me; I do not know for what reason: they 
 read the paper, but I did not understand it, and asked 
 whether the French had signed it : they said, not yet. I 
 then said I would not sign it. I told Mr. Morehouse 
 they wanted me to sign a paper. This was at the place 
 where the pole stands. I never understood the purpose 
 for which I was called to sign the paper. I worked 
 
[82] 
 
 eleven days for Baker last year, at the time of getting 
 hay : I now work for myself. They told me Chamber 
 lain had signed the paper. I dont remember anything 
 more. 
 
 Peter Sileste sworn. I was employed last Summer to 
 carry the mail from Madawaska to Lake Timisconatee : 
 as I was taking it up the river, polling up in a canoe, I 
 met John Baker coming down bhe river on a raft; he 
 came off to me in a small skiff; neither of us stopped. 
 Baker asked me in English, "Do you carry the mail?" 
 I said "Yes." He said he had orders from America 
 not to let the mail pass that way. I replied, I had no 
 orders to stop there. This was all that passed. This 
 was, I think, in July. 
 
 Joseph Sanfason sworn. I live in the Madawaska 
 settlement, half a mile below the Green river : the Green 
 river is below the Madawaska. I was born at Mada 
 waska. I bought land from J. Souci : he had a grant 
 from the government of this Province. I bought it 
 six years ago. I have been a constable for two years 
 for the parish of Kent. I was obstructed in my duty 
 of constable by Baker, Bacon, Bartlett, Savage, Shelly, 
 and Jones. I had an execution from Mr. Morehouse 
 against J. Bacon. I asked Bacon if he would come? 
 He said he would not leave the place. Baker said, it 
 is of no use for you to go there; you shall not have 
 the man. Bacon talked about settling it. Baker said, 
 Bacon you must not settle it now; you must settle it 
 another time; I will not allow any officer to go up 
 there. He asked me if I had any authority to go 
 there. I showed him the warrant: he said, if it came 
 from the States he would mind it ; but it was only from 
 Mr. Morehouse, and he would not mind it. They pre 
 vented my taking Bacon, who refused to go. This 
 took place near Baker s mill. 
 
[83] 
 
 Edward William Miller, Esq., sworn. I am high 
 sheriff of the county of York, and have been so since 
 1814. I have been acquainted with the Madawaska 
 settlement seven years. I never could make any division 
 in the settlement between the upper and the lower. 
 When I first knew it, it extended to seven miles from 
 the Falls; lately, it has come within three or four miles. 
 I know the Meriumpticook river. I have been in the 
 habit of serving writs throughout the whole of the 
 settlement, the same as in any other part of my baili 
 wick. When I first became acquainted with the settle 
 ment, I considered the inhabitants under the jurisdic 
 tion and government of this Province, without any dis 
 pute whatever. The distance is so great, I have never 
 summoned them as jurors: it would be so inconvenient 
 to attend : the inhabitants serve in the militia. I never 
 met with any obstruction in the discharge of my duty. 
 
 Peter Fraser, Esq., sworn. I have been an inhabit 
 ant of this Province since 1784: am acquainted with the 
 Madawaska settlement. It is about seven or eight years 
 since I was first there ; but I have been acquainted with 
 the settlers since 1787. I considered them always under 
 the government of this Province. The first settler I 
 knew was Capt. Duperree, a captain of the militia of 
 this Province: the date of his commission was between 
 1787 and 1790. He resided in the settlement. The 
 settlers have voted at elections: there was some difficulty 
 at first in their doing so, on account of the oath which 
 was required to be taken, as they were Catholics; but 
 when this was altered, they have voted without diffi 
 culty. To my own knowledge, they voted in 1809, 
 and ever since. I consider the Madawaska settlement as 
 extending from the Great Falls to the Canada line. I 
 have been where Baker lives ; and always deemed the 
 part above the Madawaska river as in the Madawaska 
 
[84] 
 
 settlement. There is no distinction, in this respect, 
 between what is above and below that river. The 
 Madawaska settlers are enrolled in the militia of this 
 Province; in Captain Duperree s time, there were two 
 companies. In 1824, they were formed into a separate 
 battalion, consisting of five companies: I am major of 
 the battalion. They turn out very regularly. I never 
 heard of their making any objections to training. 
 
 Henry Clopper sworn. I am clerk of the peace and 
 register of deeds for this county. I was appointed 
 clerk in 1823, and register in 1821. I succeeded my 
 father in both offices. I have discharged the duties 
 since 1820, having acted for him before receiving the 
 appointment myself. Parish officers were appointed by 
 the sessions for the parish of Kent. There was a separ 
 ate list for the Madawaska district, in that parish. I 
 have been as far up the river as ten miles above the 
 Grand Falls. There are a great many deeds registered 
 in my office of land in Madawaska, where the parties are 
 the Madawaska settlers, some as long since as twenty- 
 five or thirty years back. As clerk of the peace, I 
 receive the money given as bounty for grain raised on 
 new ground in this county. In May, 1825, the defend 
 ant, John Baker, applied to me for the bounty for grain 
 raised by him on new land. He received the bounty 
 from me. The paper now produced by me is the docu 
 ment under which he became entitled to it. I observed 
 to him that he was an alien, and I was not aware whether 
 he was strictly entitled to it. He said his certificate had 
 passed the session. The paper I now hold is the certifi 
 cate, and the only one ; it has been on file in my office 
 since. 
 
 The paper was here put in, and read by the clerk of 
 the Crown, and is as follows : 
 
 "I, John Baker, of Kent, do swear that ninety 
 
[85] 
 
 bushels of wheat were really and truly raised on the land 
 occupied by me, and are actually of the crop of the year 
 1823, (1822) and that the wood was cut down, burnt, 
 or cleared off from the land on which the same was 
 raised within two years previous to the time that the 
 said crop was taken off, and that they were of the first 
 and only crop of grain raised on land from which the 
 said wood was so cut down, burnt, or cleared off, as 
 aforesaid. 
 
 "John Baker. 
 
 "Sworn before me, at Woodstock, the 2d of July, 
 1825, (1823.) 
 
 John Bedell , Justice of the Peace. 
 
 "I verily believe the facts above stated to be just and 
 true. 
 
 "John Bedell." 
 
 I paid him by a check on Mr. Needham ; the amount 
 was 4 5s 3d; this is the order I gave Mr. Needham. 
 
 Cross-examined by defendant. Have you got the 
 receipt I gave for the money? The witness here pro 
 duced the schedule and signature to it by Baker, and 
 said this is the only receipt he gave me, except the one 
 given to Mr. Needham. 
 
 Mark Needham sworn. I remember the circumstance 
 of paying this order; the words "received payment" on 
 it are in my writing. I have no doubt I paid it, but 
 have not now any particular recollection of the defendant. 
 I considered it paid, and charged Mr. Clopper with it. 
 
 George I. Dibblee sworn. I am acquainted with the 
 hand- writing of the defendant, John Baker have seen 
 him write ; the signature to the receipt on the order is his 
 hand- writing ; I have no doubt of it. 
 
 Simon Abear, or Hibert, sworn. I live two miles 
 below Madawaska river; have lived there four (forty) 
 years next month; I moved there from the French vil- 
 
[86] 
 
 lage about ten miles above Frederickton. I have a grant 
 of my land from this Province ; it is the first grant in 
 the Madawaska, and was made about two or three years 
 after I moved up. I live under this government, and 
 have always lived under it ; all the Madawaska settlers 
 live under the same Government. I vote at elections ; 
 the first time was about eight years ago. Baker came 
 last year to my house ; he asked me what time I go to 
 train my company ; I am a captain of militia ; he said 
 there is not much occasion to train at Madawaska. I 
 inquired the reason; he said nothing; I told him I 
 would go next Saturday he must be stronger than me 
 to prevent me. I know where Baker lives ; he came five 
 or six years ago ; he has always lived at the same place 
 raised grain there; I believe he cultivated no where else. 
 Baker said I had better not train but did (not) ask me 
 not to train. 
 
 George West sworn. I know the defendant, Baker; 
 have known him since 1820; he was then settled at the 
 Bay Chaleur; I saw him next at the Madawaska; this 
 was when Judge Bliss was President, I believe 1824. I 
 seized 300 logs from him ; I was then a seizing officer ; 
 he said he wished to become a British subject, as he had 
 been here the necessary time; he inquired of me what 
 steps it would be necessary for him to take; I told him 
 as far as my information went ; this was at the place 
 where he lives; it is called Baker s mill stream; he spoke 
 as if he considered himself a resident within this Prov 
 ince, and wished to have all the lenity shown him on 
 that account ; it was shown him ; he was allowed to 
 redeem the loss at the rate of 2s 6d per thousand feet, 
 counting three logs to a thousand. The logs were seized 
 as cut on Crown lands without license. I have seen him 
 since ; there was a warrant of survey sent to me to execute 
 of this land where Baker resides; it was in Samuel 
 
[87] 
 
 Nevers name; Baker himself attended the execution of 
 the warrant, and directed the course of the lines ; the 
 privilege was considered Baker s, but taken in Nevers 
 name, as Baker was not a British subject: I think this 
 was about two years ago. 
 
 The evidence on the part of the prosecution having 
 here closed, the defendant was called upon for his defence ; 
 he addressed the court nearly as follows : 
 
 "I am a citizen of the United States, and owe alleg 
 iance to that country. I have lately received my deed 
 from the States of Maine and Massachusetts. I hold 
 myself bound to their Courts. I live in American terri 
 tory, and hold myself only liable to the courts of that 
 place, being the county of Penobscot, in the State of 
 Maine. I enter no defence, and call no evidence. I do 
 decline the j urisdiction of this court. 
 
 The defendant alluded to a letter he had, in the 
 course of the trial, handed to the Chief Justice ; which 
 was delivered to him, and he was informed he might, if 
 he chose, read it as part of his defense, but declined 
 doing so. 
 
 The Attorney General then addressed the Court, and 
 said, that, as he had, in his opening, stated generally 
 the nature of the case and evidence, and the defendant 
 had not made any defence, he did not think it necessary, 
 after so much time had been taken up and the evidence 
 so fully gone into, to address the jury, but would merely 
 read two or three additional authorities, (which he did, 
 from Starkie s Evidence, Compyn s Digest, Blackstone s 
 Commentaries, and Archbold s Criminal Pleading,) and 
 then leave the case in the hands of the Court. 
 
 Mr. Justice Chipman charged the Jury. He began 
 by stating the indictment and plea, the general nature 
 of the offence, and the proofs requisite to support the 
 charge. He said that the body of the offence was the 
 
[88] 
 
 conspiracy, and combining and confederating together 
 with the intent laid in the indictment. In the present 
 case, the intent charged was to bring into contempt the 
 King s authority, to spread false opinions among his 
 subjects as to his power and prerogative over them, and 
 in fact completely to unsettle their minds as to their 
 allegiance to the Government under which they lived. 
 This mind and intention must be made manifest by overt 
 acts. It was usual, though held not to be absolutely 
 necessary, to set forth overt acts in the indictment; 
 but if, from the facts proved in evidence, the jury 
 should be satisfied that the defendant, Baker, now on 
 trial, did combine and confederate with one or both of 
 the other defendants named in the indictment with the 
 intent imputed to them, that would be sufficient to 
 make up the offence. As the essence of the crime was 
 the combining, two persons at least must be engaged in 
 it. The Judge then stated that before going into a 
 consideration of the evidence, he would dispose of the 
 ground which the defendant had set up when called 
 upon his defence : which was, that the place where the 
 acts were committed was in the territory of the United 
 States, and that he, the defendant, was not amenable 
 to the laws, or subject to the jurisdiction of the Courts 
 of this Province. The Judge then stated that the 
 question as to the national rights to this territory, now 
 well known to be in controversy, is one which this Court 
 is utterly incompetent to enter into, and can have 
 nothing to do with. It is a matter of state, to be 
 settled between the two nations, Great Britain and the 
 United States ; to be dealt with by the Governments of 
 the two countries, and not by this Court. The Court 
 will only inquire whether the place in question is 
 actually in the possession and under the jurisdiction, and 
 laws of this Province ; and if so, the Court will maintain 
 
[89] 
 
 that jurisdiction, and continue the exercise and protec 
 tion of those laws, until some act of the King s Govern 
 ment shall effect a change. There can be no stronger 
 evidence of the possession of a country than the free and 
 uncontrolled exercise of jurisdiction within it; and the 
 Court is bound by its allegiance to the Crown, and its 
 duty to the King s subjects, to act upon this, which it 
 considers as the only principle truly applicable to the 
 case. This principle has already been acted upon in this 
 Province. 
 
 The learned Judge then referred to the case of the 
 sloop Falmouth, adjudged in the Court of Vice Admir 
 alty of this Province many years ago, (1806.) He 
 stated this to have been the case of a seizure by a British 
 officer of an American vessel lying in the waters of 
 Passamaquoddy Bay, for landing her cargo within this 
 Province; no foreign vessels being at that time admis 
 sible into the ports of these colonies. The counsel for 
 the prosecution in that case went at large into the ques 
 tion of right to all the islands in that bay, under the 
 provisions of the treaty of 1783, and contended that, by 
 virtue of that treaty, all the islands, including Moose, 
 Dudley, and Frederick Islands, then in the actual pos 
 session of the United States, of right belonged to Great 
 Britain; and that no foreign vessel could lawfully lade 
 (land) a cargo in any part of that bay ; but the learned 
 judge of that Court at that time, now one of the Judges 
 of this Court, (Mr. Justice Botsford,) in pronouncing 
 judgment, would not enter upon the question of right 
 to the islands, which he considered a matter of state for 
 the two Governments to decide upon; but finding the 
 three islands beforenamed to be under the actual pos 
 session and jurisdiction of the United States, he applied 
 the principle of the law of nations applicable to a water 
 boundary between two different countries, and directed 
 
[90] 
 
 his attention solely to the point whether the vessel 
 laded her cargo on the British side of a middle line drawn 
 between these islands then in the possession of the 
 United States, and the British islands opposite. It 
 thus appears that this doctrine of taking the actual 
 state of things as we find them, and applying the law 
 accordingly, has been already acted upon in this Prov 
 ince, in an instance where it was favorable to citizens 
 of the United States ; and this Court has no hesitation 
 in applying the same doctrine, which it considers as 
 the true doctrine, to the present case. It is to be 
 observed that the defendant in the present case has 
 given no evidence whatever of the place in question 
 being in the possession or under the jurisdiction of 
 the United States; that he does not appear to be in 
 any respect an agent of that Government, or acting 
 under its authority ; and that what has been done must 
 be considered as being altogether the acts of unauthor 
 ized individuals. The place where the transaction 
 occurred goes by the general name of the Madawaska 
 settlement; and if this settlement shall appear to be, 
 in point of fact, under the jurisdiction of this Province, 
 the case must receive the same consideration, and the 
 conduct of the defendant be viewed in the same light, as 
 if the acts complained of had been committed in any 
 other part of the Province, one hundred miles further 
 down on the river St. John, or even in this town of 
 Frederickton. 
 
 The learned Judge then proceeded to read over the 
 whole of the testimony from his notes, commenting upon 
 the several parts of it as he went on. He considered the 
 overt acts as to hoisting of the flag of the United 
 States with the express intention of subverting British 
 authority, as most distinctly and fully proved and asked 
 what more unequivocal indication there could be of an 
 
[91] 
 
 intention to bring the King s Government into con 
 tempt, and of unsettling the administration of the laws 
 of the Province, than the erecting of a foreign standard 
 with this declared purpose. With respect to the trans 
 action with the postman he directed the jury that if 
 they considered the acts of the defendant in this instance 
 to have proceeded from the combination and confederacy 
 to subvert the King s authority, the defendant was 
 properly chargeable with them under this indictment; 
 and that, in forming their judgment of this and all the 
 other facts detailed in evidence, they should take into 
 view all the circumstances of time and place, and of 
 action, in determining the character of the several 
 transactions. With respect to the written agreement, 
 by which they bound themselves to resist the British 
 laws,, he thought that was sufficiently proved with 
 regard to the American citizens; but it was not made 
 out in proof that this was the same paper which was 
 handed to the French settlers; but the learned Judge 
 said that he could not admit of any distinction in this 
 respect between aliens being under the jurisdiction and 
 protection of the British laws and natural born subjects; 
 the former owed a local allegiance ; and what would be a 
 breach of the laws by the one, would be so by the other, 
 The learned Judge, in closing, stated, that if, in 
 determining the present case, this court was to under 
 take to enter upon a question of a conflict of rights 
 between the two nations, it might be disposed to 
 approach it with a degree of trepidation : but this case 
 was altogether unembarrassed by any such considerations. 
 It presented a chain of evidence of clear possession and 
 undisturbed jurisdiction on the part of this Province 
 from the period of its first erection down to the present 
 time a space of more than forty years. One of the 
 oldest inhabitants in the Madawaska settlement had 
 
[92] 
 
 proved that he removed thither from the lower part of 
 this Province forty years ago ; that he, and all the set 
 tlers there, always considered themselves as living under 
 this Government. It is also proved that these inhabi 
 tants have received grants of land from this Govern 
 ment, and have, from the beginning, been enrolled in 
 the militia; that they have voted at elections for the 
 county of York; have applied to the Provincial courts 
 for redress in all suits at law ; and have uniformly exer 
 cised all the privileges, and been subject to all the duties, 
 of other inhabitants of the Province; excepting only 
 that the sheriff states that he has not summoned them 
 to attend on juries at Frederickton by reason of their 
 great distance ; but he expressly declared that he has 
 always been in the habit of serving writs throughout 
 the whole of that settlement, as much as in any other 
 part of his bailiwick. It appears also that the defend 
 ant, Baker, considered himself as living within the terri 
 tory, and under the jurisdiction of this Province; that 
 he applied to Mr. Morehouse, the Provincial magistrate 
 for processes to recover his debts from inhabitants in the 
 Madawaska settlement ; that he received the Provincial 
 bounty for grain raised on land, which there can be no 
 question is the land on which he now resides, and this on 
 his own affidavit, stating himself to be John Baker, of 
 the parish of Kent. It further appears that he attended 
 a Provincial Surveyor in laying out this very land, for 
 which a warrant of survey, under the authority of the 
 Province, was in a course of execution, giving directions 
 as to the course of the lines ; the grant being intended 
 for the benefit of Baker, although it was to be taken 
 out in the name of Nevers, a British subject. Baker 
 himself, also, had an intention of being naturalized, and 
 stated to one of the witnesses, Mr. George West, that 
 he had resided the necessary time, and wished to know 
 
[93] 
 
 what other steps were necessary for this purpose. This 
 conversation taking place on the spot where he lived, at 
 the head of the Madawaska settlement, and at a time 
 when logs cut by him had been seized as being cut on 
 crown lands without license; and Baker claimed to be 
 dealt favorably with by reason of his residence within 
 the Province, and his intention to become naturalized. 
 The learned Judge also stated that it appeared from the 
 evidence that there was no line of division to be drawn 
 between any parts of that whole settlement, as to the 
 possession and exercise of jurisdiction by this Province; 
 that he could not imagine any principle upon which any 
 such line of division could be made; that one of the 
 witnesses spoke of the settlement having, when he first 
 knew it, commenced seven miles above the Great Falls ; 
 that it has since extended downwards to within two or 
 three miles of the Falls. It has also been gradually 
 extending upwards, and all the inhabitants, in every part 
 of it, were equally under the jurisdiction of this Prov 
 ince, and entitled to the benefit and protection of its 
 laws ; and if they were to be transferred from this juris 
 diction and protection, it must be by some act of the 
 King s Government, competent for that purpose. 
 
 The learned Judge, with these observations, left the 
 case to the Jury, directing them to consider it in the 
 same light, and to give the defendant the benefit of the 
 same considerations, that they would in the case of any 
 other inhabitants of the Province. 
 
 The jury retired from the box, and, after about an 
 hour s deliberation, returned into court with a verdict of 
 guilty. 
 
 The defendant was then required to enter into recog 
 nizance to appear on Monday next to receive the sentence 
 of the court. The same bail were accepted as before, in 
 the same amount. 
 
[94] 
 
 The Attorney General stated to the court that he 
 should enter a noli prosequi on the ex-officio information 
 which had been filed against the defendant; and also on 
 the indictment which had been found against John Baker 
 and six others for a riot, so far as regarded the present 
 defendant. 
 
 The witnesses were informed that their further attend 
 ance would not be required. 
 
 Monday, May 12, 1828. 
 
 Present: His Honor the Chief Justice, Judge Bliss, 
 and Judge Chipman. 
 
 The defendant being called, and appearing, the Attor 
 ney General proceeded to make several observations on 
 the case, and concluded by moving the judgment of the 
 court. 
 
 His Honor, Mr. Justice Bliss, then inquired of the 
 defendant if he had anything to say in mitigation, or 
 any affidavits to produce. 
 
 The defendant said he had little to say. He was 
 brought there, and made amenable to the jurisdiction of 
 the court, and must of course submit. He had no affi 
 davits to produce: there were some facts, which, if they 
 had been brought forward, might have been material; 
 but as he was not prepared with the whole, he had 
 thought it better not to adduce any proof. He con 
 cluded by submitting himself to the consideration of the 
 court. 
 
 Mr. Justice Bliss then proceeded to pass sentence to 
 the following effect : 
 
 That the defendant had been indicted by the grand 
 jury of the county of York for a seditious conspiracy, 
 entered into by him and others, within the jurisdiction 
 of this court, to which he had pleaded not guilty, alleg 
 ing, at the same time, that he did not consider himself 
 
[95] 
 
 amenable to the process of this court, being a citizen of 
 the United States, and that the offence charged was 
 committed within their territory ; but the court could 
 not admit this to be the case, it appearing clearly that 
 the Madawaska settlement where the offence was com 
 mitted, has been, from the first erection of the Province, 
 hitherto under our laws, and subject to our jurisdiction; 
 and that the defendant, after a very fair and full investi 
 gation of the case, had been convicted by a jury of the 
 country ; and it now remains for the court to pass their 
 sentence upon him for this offence ; in doing which their 
 object was to treat him with that lenity which, so far as 
 was consistent with the end of justice, is uniformly 
 extended to His Majesty s natural born subjects; and, 
 although the court considered the offence of which he 
 had been found guilty of a very aggravated nature, they 
 have had regard to his previous long imprisonment ; and 
 their object being to secure the future peace of the 
 country, and not to pass a vindictive sentence personally 
 against him, they had awarded the punishment accord 
 ingly ; and did sentence him to be imprisoned in the 
 common gaol of the county of York for the term of two 
 calendar months, and to pay a fine to our lord the King 
 of twenty five pounds, and remain committed until the 
 same was paid. 
 
 The defendant John Baker was then taken into custody 
 by the Sheriff. 
 
 DEFENCE OF THE FRONTIER OF MAINE. 
 
 A communication in relation to this subject has been 
 made by the Secretary of War, in compliance with a 
 resolution, to the U. S. Senate. It contains a variety 
 of documents, and among them the reports of Gen. 
 Wool and Major Graham, of a reconnoissance of our 
 
[96] 
 
 Frontier made by them the past summer. This recon- 
 noissance was made in obedience to instructions from the 
 War Department, given in consequence of the repre 
 sentations to the department by Gov. Kent, and the 
 earnest solicitations made by him of the importance of 
 such a movement, and the necessity of having our 
 frontier better fortified. We shall give such portions 
 of these reports as will be of interest to our readers, 
 commencing with Gen. Wool s. 
 
 From the Report of Brigadier General John E. Wool to 
 
 the Secretary of the Treasury. 
 Head 
 
 Quarters, Troy, N. Y. ) 
 October 30, 1838. J 
 
 Sir: 
 
 Herewith, I have the honor to transmit a report of 
 the military reconnoissance of the frontier of Maine, 
 made during the summer past, in obedience to instruc 
 tions received from the War Department, dated the 12th 
 May and 16th of June last. 
 
 Agreeably to your verbal instructions communicated 
 at Washington, I repaired to Augusta, (Maine.) and 
 conferred with his Excellency Edward Kent, on the sub 
 ject of the reconnoissance required. He not only 
 appeared much pleased with the object, but offered every 
 assistance in his power to aid in its prosecution. I 
 remained at Augusta until I was joined, the 28th June, 
 by Major Graham and Lieutenant Johnson, of the topo 
 graphical engineers. On the 29th of June, we pro 
 ceeded to Bangor, where I was delayed until the 3d of 
 July, in consequence of some preparations on the part 
 of Major Graham, before he could commence his topo 
 graphical sketches or surveys. The Major having com 
 pleted his arrangements, we set out on the 3d of July 
 
[97] 
 
 for the examination of the northwestern frontier of the 
 State, confining ourselves within the undisputed limits, 
 as prescribed by your instructions of the 16th June. 
 
 After exploring Moosehead lake, Moose River, and 
 the country west of Moosehead lake as far as the high 
 lands which divide the State of Maine from Lower 
 Canada, I selected a position for the establishment of a 
 military post for the protection and defense of the 
 northwestern frontier of the State, on the height about 
 one mile north of Moose river, fourteen miles south of 
 the line, on the road called the Canada road, leading to 
 Quebec. This position is a commanding one, and would 
 be highly important if by any circumstance England 
 should be induced to invade Maine, from the direction of 
 Quebec or Lower Canada. It is situated on the only 
 route by which a military force would attempt to pene 
 trate the country from Lower Canada. Any other route 
 would be attended with almost insurmountable difficulties, 
 and could not fail to retard the advance of any army. 
 On either side of the Canada road, for nearly or quite 
 forty miles south of the line, the country is unsettled 
 and covered with a dense forest, through which roads 
 must be cut and made, streams bridged, and boats built, 
 and where neither forage, provisions or any other sup 
 plies could be obtained. If England, however, should 
 make war upon the United States in order to secure the 
 possession of the disputed territory in question, she 
 would not waste her resources by contending for it in the 
 wilds or dense forests of Maine. Having an army and 
 a navy at her disposal, she would endeavor to compel 
 the U. States to a cession of it by the destruction of 
 our commerce, navy depots, commercial cities and 
 frontier towns. These, with the present disposition of 
 the military establishment of the country constitute our 
 vulnerable points, and of which England would not fail 
 
[98] 
 
 to take advantage. She would neither send her armies 
 into our forests, nor into the heart of the country, from 
 whence it is not probable they would return. She may, 
 however, threaten Maine, from Quebec, and perhaps 
 carry on a predatory warfare, by means of the Canada 
 road. To protect the frontier and prevent such inroads 
 upon the people, I would establish a post with two com 
 panies of infantry, near Moose river, with a post of 
 observation on the height of land dividing Maine from 
 Lower Canada. The depot of supplies for those posts I 
 would establish on the south side of Moose river, one 
 mile from the principal post. The Kennebec forks I 
 would designate as a principal depot and place of con 
 centration for the militia of that section of the country. 
 
 The heights surrounding the forks are well calculated 
 for defence, and would enable a small force, well directed, 
 to hold a larger one in check until the militia of the 
 country could be collected. 
 
 Before closing this part of my report it may not be 
 improper to remark, that a road has been cut out, but 
 not made, north of the military position selected near 
 Moose river, leading from the Canada road to the head 
 of Moosehead Lake. It has been suggested that a mili 
 tary force from Quebec or Lower Canada, might pene 
 trate Maine by that road and Moosehead lake. In 
 answer to which I have only to observe that no general, 
 who understood his profession, would invade Maine by 
 any route destitute of forage, provisions, or the means 
 of transportation. On the contrary, he would take the 
 route that would furnish the greatest amount of supplies, 
 and the greatest facilities of marching into the heart of 
 the country. To take the route referred to, he would 
 be compelled to make roads, construct bridges and boats, 
 and to carry with him his forage, provisions, and the 
 means of land transportation. In such a case, it would 
 
[99] 
 
 require no foresight to predict the result. He would 
 beyond all question be defeated, if the people of Maine 
 were true to themselves, and true to the country. 
 
 Deeming no other posts than those above mentioned 
 necessary for the defence or protection of the north 
 western frontier of Maine, I returned to Bangor, leaving 
 Major Graham and Lieutenant Johnson to make the 
 required surveys and sketches. 
 
 On the 16th of July, accompanied by his Excellency 
 Edward Kent, I set out to examine the eastern and 
 northeastern frontier of the State. On the 17th, we 
 examined the military position at Houlton, which I con 
 sider well calculated for the defence and protection of 
 that region of country. With proper works, and a gar 
 rison composed of six companies of infantry, and two of 
 artillery, I do not believe any attempt would be made 
 from New Brunswick to invade the disputed territory, or 
 by that route to invade the settled parts of Maine. A 
 general commanding at Fredericton, or St. Johns, with 
 a large disposable force, might attempt an enterprise 
 against the garrison at Houlton, intercept its communi 
 cation with, and cut off its retreat to Bangor. This 
 might be done by way of Woodstock, Eel river, or the 
 Lakes Magaguadaweek and Chiputnaticook, or Grand 
 Lake. From Woodstock, through by roads, the Mili 
 tary road could be reached five miles south and in the 
 rear of Houlton. By Eel river and Dunn s on the 
 Calais road, the same point could be reached. By the 
 lakes above mentioned, and Butterfield s on the Calais 
 road, the military road could be intercepted by a cross 
 road, eight miles south of the Mattawamkeag forks, and 
 about thirty eight miles south of Houlton. 
 
 This route will be the shortest from Fredericton and 
 in the winter the easiest to be accomplished. It is, 
 however, not probable that in the present wild state of 
 
[100] 
 
 the country, no roads being made except from Fredericton 
 to Woodstock, any movement of the kind would be 
 made with eight companies of regular troops at Houlton 
 and a respectable force at Calais. Such a movement by 
 the British forces would undoubtedly produce a cor 
 responding one on the part of the United States troops 
 at Calais, against Fredericton or St. Johns, which, unless 
 the British were in great force at those places, would 
 produce a recall of any movement against Houlton or 
 the disputed territory. No military commander would 
 hazard an enterprise against Houlton or the disputed 
 territory, if by such a movement he could possibly lose 
 Fredericton or St. Johns which would give to the con 
 querors the finest part of New Brunswick. 
 
 To guard against any movement as suggested, I would 
 recommend that a regiment of infantry and two com 
 panies of artillery be stationed at Calais, and one com 
 pany of infantry and one of artillery at Eastport, with 
 posts of observation at Butterfield s and Dunn s on the 
 Calais road, leading to Houlton. From Calais, Frederic- 
 ton or St. Johns might be reached in three days. Should 
 the above recommendations be adopted, I would desig 
 nate Calais as a proper place for the main depot of sup 
 plies and concentration of the militia for the defence of 
 the eastern frontier; and the Mattawamkeag forks for 
 the depot and concentration of the militia for the defence 
 of the disputed territory and the northeastern frontier. 
 
 In addition to the above, I would recommend the 
 erection of an arsenal near Bangor, on the right or left 
 bank of the Penobscot. Also a fortification and garri 
 son at the entrance of both the Penobscot and Kenne- 
 bec. 
 
 From a statement received from his excellency Edward 
 Kent, it would appear that the militia of Maine exceeds 
 forty -one thousand. 
 
[101] 
 
 Of these, in the course of ten days, 4,500 could be 
 collected at the forks of the Kennebec, 4,000 at the 
 Mattawamkeag forks, and 2,500 at Calais. In twenty 
 days there could be 12,000 collected at the Kennebec 
 forks, 10,000 at the Mattawamkeag forks and 8,000 at 
 Calais. 
 
 The above calculation, however, is made up on the 
 supposition that they would be called out as organized by 
 regiments and brigades. A draft would take a longer 
 period, but the same number of men could be obtained. 
 
 It would also appear, from the same statement, that 
 the State has in depot 9,000 muskets, 2,200 rifles, 350 
 pistols, and 850 swords, and a good supply of equip 
 ments, all in good order and fit for service. The arms 
 and equipments, however, in the possession of the 
 militia, are generally small, and too light for active ser 
 vice. 
 
 I am, very respectfully, your obedient survent, 
 
 JOHN E. WOOL. 
 To the Hon. J. R. Poinsett, 
 
 Secretary of War. 
 
 Fredericton, Feb. 13, 1839. 
 
 By His Excellency Major General Sir John Harvey, K. 
 C. B. and K. C. H., Lieut. Governor and Com 
 mander in Chief of the Province of New Brunswick, 
 etc. etc. etc. 
 
 John Harvey. 
 
 A PROCLAMATION. 
 
 Whereas, I have received information that a party of 
 armed persons to the number of two hundred or more, 
 have invaded a portion of this province, under the juris 
 diction of Her Majesty s Government, from the neighbor- 
 
ing State of Maine, for the professed object of exercis 
 ing authority, and driving off persons stated to be cut 
 ting therein and that divers other persons have without 
 any legal authority, taken up arms for the purpose of 
 resisting such invasion and outrage, and have broken 
 open certain stores in Woodstock, in which Arms and 
 Ammunition belonging to Her Majesty were deposited, 
 and have taken the same away for that purpose I do 
 hereby charge and command all persons concerned in 
 such illegal acts, forthwith to return the Arms and 
 Ammunition, so illegally taken, to their place of deposite, 
 as the Government of the Province will take care to 
 adopt all necessary measures for resisting any hostile 
 invasion or outrage that may be attempted upon any 
 part of Her Majesty s Territory or Subjects. 
 
 And I do hereby charge and command all Magistrates, 
 Sheriffs, and other officers, to be vigilent, aiding and 
 assisting in the apprehension of all persons so offending, 
 and to bring them to justice, And in order to aid and 
 assist the Civil Power in that respect, if necessary, I 
 have ordered sufficient Military Force to proceed forth 
 with to the places where these Outrages are represented 
 to have been committed as well to prevent Foreign 
 invasion, as to prevent the illegal assumption of Arms 
 by her Majesty s Subjects in this Province. 
 
 And further, in order to be prepared, if necessary to 
 call in the aid of the Constitutional Militia Force of the 
 country. I do hereby charge and command the officers 
 commanding the first and second Battalions of the militia 
 of the County of Carleton, forthwith to proceed as the 
 Law directs, to the drafting of a body of men, to con 
 sist of one fourth of the strength of each of these battal 
 ions, to be in readiness for actual service, should occa 
 sion require. 
 
[103] 
 
 Given under my Hand and Seal at Fredericton, the 
 Thirteenth day of February, in the year of our 
 Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty- 
 nine, and in the second year of Her Majesty s 
 reign. 
 
 By his Excellency s Command. 
 
 WM. F. ODELL. 
 
 (Whig Editorial, Feb. 6, 1839.) 
 THE AROOSTOOK EXPEDITION. 
 
 When we first heard of the capture of the Land Agent 
 and several others, and the sudden retreat of the Sheriff 
 with his posse, we supposed in common with most of 
 our fellow citizens here, that this was effected by a small 
 body of trespassers, who would hold together only a few 
 days, and that the prisoners would be released after a 
 short detention and that this whole matter in the way 
 it had been conducted and terminated, was a fair sub 
 ject of ridicule, and was treated accordingly. It was a 
 proper subject of game, which any one had a right to 
 hunt down. We wish, however, to be understood, that 
 we are wholly in favor of the object of this expedition, 
 we feel desirous of seeing our country protected and 
 jurisdiction enforced within our territorial lines according 
 to the treaty of 1783. 
 
 If the Provincial Government have interferred in this 
 matter by arresting and imprisoning any of our citizens, 
 in the rightful exercise of their legal duties within our 
 own territory, we stand ready to shoulder our musket 
 and take our chance in the front rank of our militia 
 and entertain not the slightest doubt but that the whole 
 body of our citizens would rise as one man, to defend 
 the territory purchased by the blood of our fathers. 
 
[104] 
 
 But we have the right to demand that wise counsellors 
 and energetic men shall move in this business and stand 
 at the head of affairs not such brawling and noisy 
 politicians, such weak, inefficient and feather-bed men as 
 have recently been shoved forward into this Aroostook 
 expedition and have disgraced it. We have no desire to 
 throw the slightest obstacle in the way of this affair, and 
 it gives us great pleasure to learn that Jonathan P. 
 Rogers, Esq. has been despatched by the Governor and 
 Council, to hold an interview with Sir John Harvey, in 
 reference to this business. 
 
 If Gov. Fairfield had taken this step in the first place, 
 as Gov. Kent did in reference to the Boundary Commis 
 sioners, there would have been little or no trouble in 
 driving off the trespassers from the disputed territory. 
 But this, the Governor was unwilling to do, after his 
 party had reviled and ridiculed Gov. Kent, in the man 
 ner they have done, for the course he took. Having 
 now begun this business upon the Whig policy pursued 
 by Gov. Kent, we cannot doubt of a successful issue. 
 
 (Editorial in Whig, Feb. 22, 1839.) 
 STEADY. 
 
 Our State has been for the 3d time invaded and our 
 citizens forcibly arrested, carried away and incarcerated 
 in a FOREIGN JAIL. The first time, Mr. Baker and 
 his neighbors, next Mr. Greely, and now the Land 
 Agent and his assistants. We have remonstrated and 
 entreated long enough and to no purpose. We now 
 appeal to arms. We now appeal to the law of nature, 
 recognized by all communities, for that protection which 
 has been denied us by the General Government. Be the 
 issue what it may, upon this question the whole State is 
 united to a man, and will carry into the conflict its 
 
[105] 
 
 undivided energies. As we are in this city in the midst 
 of a great excitement it behooves us all to keep calm 
 and cool and proceed with the utmost deliberation. 
 Expresses are passing every day through this city from 
 the Aroostook and from the Province to Augusta and 
 back our streets for the last two days have been filled 
 with the busy preparations for the Aroostook expedition. 
 The artillery has been forwarded and large quantities of 
 amunition, provisions, forage, etc. Twenty men are 
 engaged at the Foundry casting balls. Bodies of volun 
 teers from the country are passing through the city 
 hourly, and not less than 500 are now between this 
 place and Matawamkeag Point. The draft of one thous 
 and men has been made in this division, and they will all 
 be on the march to morrow. 
 
 (Whig Correspondence.) 
 
 Friday, 9 o clock. A. M. 
 
 AROOSTOOK EXPEDITION. 
 
 The remainder of the detachment have left the city, 
 and somewhat of the intense excitement is abated which 
 has pervaded our own citizens, and the crowd of specta 
 tors which have thronged the city. Most of the detach 
 ment left the city yesterday in small squads, and this 
 arrangement of the march we hope will secure comfortable 
 and warm quarters to the zealous and patriotic Militia. 
 Every aid will be given by the citizens along the line to 
 the proper officers, and the men will be received in the 
 most kind and hospitable manner. The appearance of 
 the troops was such as excited our surprise and admira 
 tion. Coming together at a moments notice, every man 
 seemed to be prepared for duty and eager to reach the 
 scene of operations. The Commander in Chief ordered,. 
 
[106] 
 
 we understand, a rendezvous of the force on Thursday 
 at 10 o clock, most of which, we have said, left town the 
 same day, and the remainder this morning. The 
 promptitude with which the call of the Commanding 
 General has been obeyed and the order and enthusiasm 
 of the troops and the universal impression of the ability 
 and energy of the Commanding General, has impressed 
 the whole community with a full confidence in its success. 
 
 (Editorial in Whig, Feb. 23, 1839.) 
 THE ASSERTION OF THE AGE. 
 
 The assertion of the Age, that we wished to cast 
 ridicule on the Aroostook Expedition, is wholly false. 
 We shall not bandy words with a paper which thus 
 attempts to turn the present crisis to political account. 
 We did think it strange that the person entrusted with 
 the command, should have suffered himself to have been 
 taken in the manner he was. We are not opposed to the 
 Expedition, and never have been, and as long as it is 
 conducted properly we shall not utter a syllable against 
 it. The Whigs of the State have but one wish, one 
 opinion, in regard to the course to be pursued they are 
 anxious that Gov. Fairfield should go on, without falter 
 ing in the least ; we hope that he will not, and that the 
 State will not retrace a single step, in the position she 
 has taken. A holier spirit than that of party, should 
 now animate the people. The crisis demands the united 
 energy and action of all parties, and we doubt not, that 
 the one sentiment, the one feeling, the deep enthusiasm 
 which pervades every bosom, will continue thus universal, 
 until the rights of our noble State are established beyond 
 a doubt and fully and honorably recognized. The honor 
 and interest of the whole State must be maintained at 
 all hazards. We shall have no fears of the issue of the 
 
[107] 
 
 conflict, knowing as we do, that the citizens of Maine 
 will not prove recreant to duty, and the obligations now 
 resting upon them. 
 
 While we would not have the Whigs, as a party for 
 get for a moment, the ancient landmarks, of their political 
 faith, and the strong grounds of their opposition to the 
 State and National Administrations, so neither would 
 we have them, in the least, abate in their ardor and 
 anxiety to bring our boundary rights to a successful 
 termination. Though we may have occasion, hereafter, 
 to revert to the conduct and management of certain 
 individuals at the commencement of this interesting 
 enterprise, we shall not be backward in upholding the 
 great object which the State, as one people, has in view. 
 The present movement we should regard as National, 
 and we shall not be found wanting in the bold mainte 
 nance of the honor and welfare of the State. 
 
 (Whig Correspondence.) 
 FROM HOULTON. 
 
 Tuesday, 9 o clock A. M. 
 
 An express has just arrived from the Aroostook bring 
 ing the information that our Land Agent has been put 
 into close jail. Just look at the contrast. The British 
 Land Agent was brought here in a coach with four 
 horses, a prisoner, carried to the Bangor House, and 
 invited to one of the best rooms in the House, and 
 received the best of fare, while our Agent was dragged 
 on a horse sled to Frederickton and incarcerated within 
 the walls of a prison. Should not such treatment cause 
 the blood of every American to boil with indignation? 
 
 11 o clock A. M. 
 
 The Augusta Light Infantry Company has just arrived 
 in this city. 
 
[108] 
 
 (Whig Correspondence.) 
 
 Saturday, 5 o clock, P. M. 
 
 A company of Cavalry, consisting of 48 men. have 
 just arrived in this city from Waldo county. 
 
 We have just seen a gentleman who left the Aroostook 
 on Thursday. The volunteers have erected a fort with 
 logs, and have five field pieces mounted. They were all 
 in fine spirits. The Waldo volunteers, the Piscataquis 
 volunteers, and the Brewer volunteers, arrived at No. 4, 
 about 36 miles this side of the camp on Thursday night. 
 The Bangor Artillery and Dexter Artillery arrived at 
 Lincoln on Friday night, and the Dexter Rifle corps were 
 about 5 miles this side of Lincoln on Saturday morning. 
 
 Four of the British Regular troops, deserters from the 
 Provinces, arrived at Lincoln on Friday night. Deser 
 tions are taking place daily, and some of these liberty- 
 loving fellows have already enlisted in one of the com 
 panies of the 3d Division. The "stars and stripes" 
 will coax many of her Majesty s subjects to their ample 
 folds. 
 
 GOVERNOR FAIRFIELD S ADDRESS TO TROOPS. 
 
 Fellow Soldiers : An unfounded, unjust, and insult 
 ing claim of title has been made by the British Govern 
 ment to more than one- third of the whole territory of 
 your State. More than this, it insists upon having 
 exclusive jurisdiction and possession until its claims of 
 title is settled while in the meantime its subjects are 
 stripping this territory of its valuable growth of timber, 
 in defiance of your authority and your power. A few 
 days since you sent a civil force under your Land Agent, 
 to drive off these bands of armed plunderers and protect 
 your property from their work of devastation. But the 
 Agent while employed in the performance of this duty, 
 
[109] 
 
 with two of his assistants, were seized, transported 
 beyond the bounds of the State, and incarcerated in a 
 foreign jail under British authorities. Those who remain 
 are threatened with a forcible expulsion by British 
 troops, if they do not immediately leave the territory 
 and abandon your property to proffered protection of 
 Her Majesty s Lieutenant Governor. And perhaps 
 before this moment, your soil has not only been polluted 
 by the invader s footsteps, but the blood of our citizens 
 may have been shed by British Myrmidons. 
 
 The Age states that part of the detachment left for 
 the frontier on Wednesday, and the remainder on Thurs 
 day morning. 
 
 (From Maine Newspapers, 1839.) 
 THE SOLDIERS SONG. 
 
 Tune Auld Lang Syne. 
 
 We are marching on to Madawask, 
 To fight the trespassers; 
 We ll teach the British how to walk 
 And come off conquerors. 
 
 We ll have our land right good and clear, 
 For all the English say; 
 They shall not cut another log, 
 Nor stay another day. 
 
 They need not think to have our land, 
 We Yankees can fight well; 
 We ve whipped them twice most manfully, 
 As every child can tell. 
 
 And if the Tyrants say one word, 
 A third time we will show, 
 How high the Yankee spirit runs, 
 And what our guns can do. 
 
 They better much all stay at home, 
 And mind their business there; 
 The way we treated them before, 
 Made all the Nations stare. 
 
[HO] 
 
 Come on! brace fellows, one and all! 
 The Red-coats ne er shall say, 
 We Yankees, feared to meet them armed, 
 So gave our land away. 
 
 We ll feed them well with ball and shot. 
 We ll cut these Red-coats down, 
 Before we yield to them an inch 
 Or title of our ground. 
 
 Ye Husbands, Fathers, Brothers, Sons, 
 From every quarter come! 
 March, to the bugle and- the fife! 
 March, to the beating drum! 
 
 Onward! my Lads so brave and true 
 Our Country s right demands 
 With justice, and with glory fight, 
 For these Aroostook lands. 
 
 Bangor, Feb. 21, 1839. 
 
 (From Maine Newspapers, 1839.) 
 MAINE BATTLE SONG. 
 
 Come, sogers! take your muskets up, 
 
 And grasp your faithful rifles; 
 We re going to lick the red coat men, 
 
 Who call us yankees, "trifles." 
 Bring out the big gun made of brass, 
 
 Which forges July thunder; 
 Bring out the flag of Bennington, 
 
 And strike the foe with wonder. 
 
 We ll lick the red coats any how, 
 
 And drive them from our border; 
 The loggers are awake and all 
 
 Await the Gin rals order; 
 Britannia shall not rule the Maine, 
 
 Nor shall she rule the water; 
 They ve sung that song full long enough, 
 
 Much longer than they oughter. 
 
 The Aroostook s right slick stream, 
 Has nation sights of woodlands, 
 
 And hang the feller that would lose 
 His footing on such good lands. 
 
[Ill] 
 
 And all along the boundary line 
 There s pasturing for cattle; 
 
 But where that line of boundary is, 
 We must decide by battle. 
 
 We do not care about the land, 
 
 But they shan t hook it from us; 
 
 Our country, right or wrong, we cry- 
 No budging or compromise. 
 
 So beat the sheepskin blow the fife, 
 And march in training order; 
 
 Our wave is through the wilderness, 
 And all along the border. 
 
 Head Quarters, Eastern Division, ) 
 
 United States, Army, > 
 
 Augusta, Me. March 21, 1839. ) 
 
 The undersigned, a Major General in the Army of 
 the United States being specially charged with maintain 
 ing the peace and safety of their entire Northern and 
 Eastern Frontiers, having cause to apprehend a collision 
 of arms between the proximate forces of New Brunswick 
 and the State of Maine on the disputed territory which 
 is claimed by both, has the honor, in the sincere desire 
 of the United States to preserve the relations of peace 
 and amity with Great Britain relations which might be 
 much endangered by such untoward collison to invite 
 from His Excellency Major General Sir John Harvey, 
 Lieutenant Governor, etc. etc., a general declaration 
 to this effect. 
 
 That it is not the intention of the Lieutenant Gov 
 ernor of Her Brittannic Majesty s Province of New 
 Brunswick, under the expected renewal of negociations 
 between the Cabinets of London and Washington on the 
 subject of the said disputed territory, without renewed 
 instructions to that effect from his Government, to seek 
 to take the Military possession of that territory, or to 
 
[112] 
 
 seek to expel therefrom the armed Civil posse, or the 
 troops of Maine. 
 
 Should the undersigned have the honor to be favored 
 with such declaration or assurance to be by him com 
 municated to his Excellency the Governor of the State 
 of Maine, the undersigned does not in the least doubt 
 that he would be immediately and fully authorized by 
 the Governor of Maine to communicate to his Excellency, 
 the Lieutenant Governor of New Brunswick a corre 
 sponding pacific declaration to this effect: 
 
 That in the hope of a speedy and satisfactory settle 
 ment, by negociation between the Governments of the 
 United States and Great Britain of the principal or 
 boundary question between the State of Maine and the 
 Province of New Brunswick, it is not the intention of 
 the Governor of Maine, without renewed instructions 
 from the Legislature of the State, to attempt to disturb 
 by arms, the said Province in the possession of the 
 Madawaska settlements, or to attempt to interrupt the 
 usual communications between that Province and Her 
 Majesty s Upper Provinces; and that he is willing in the 
 mean time, to leave the question of possession and juris 
 diction as they at present stand; that is, Great Britain, 
 holding, in fact, possession of a part of the said territory 
 and the Government of Maine denying her right to such 
 possession ; and the State of Maine holding, in fact, 
 possession of another portion of the same territory to 
 which her right is denied by Great Britain. 
 
 With this understanding the Governor of Maine will, 
 without unnecessary delay, withdraw the Military force 
 of the State from the said disputed territory leaving 
 only, under a Land Agent, a small civil posse, armed 
 or unarmed, to protect the timber recently cut, and to 
 prevent future depredations. 
 
[113] 
 
 Reciprocal assurance of the foregoing friendly char 
 acter having been, through the undersigned, inter 
 changed, all danger of collision between the immediate 
 parties to the controversy will be at once removed, and 
 time allowed the United States and Great Britain to 
 settle amicably the great question of limits. 
 
 The undersigned has much pleasure in renewing to 
 His Excellency, Major General Sir John Harvey the 
 assurances of his ancient high consideration and respect. 
 
 WINFIELD SCOTT. 
 
 To a copy of the foregoing, Sir John Harvey annexed 
 the following : 
 
 The undersigned, Major General Sir John Harvey, 
 Lieutenant Governor of Her Britannic Majesty s Province 
 of New Brunswick, having received a proposition from 
 Major General Winfield Scott of the United States 
 Army, of which the foregoing is a copy, hereby, on his 
 part, signifies his concurrence and acquiescence therein. 
 
 Sir John Harvey renews with great pleasure to Major 
 General Scott, the assurance of his warmest personal 
 consideration, regard and respect. 
 
 J. HARVEY. 
 
 Government House, Fredericton, 
 
 New Brunswick, March 23, 1839. 
 
 To a paper containing the note of General Scott, 
 and the acceptance of Sir John Harvey, Governor 
 Fairfield annexed his acceptance in these words : 
 
 Executive Department, \ 
 
 Augusta, March 25, 1839. [ 
 
 The undersigned, Governor of Maine, in consideration 
 of the foregoing, the exigency for calling out the troops 
 of Maine have ceased, has no hesitation in signifying his 
 entire acquiescence in the proposition of Major General 
 Scott. 
 
[114] 
 
 The undersigned has the honor to tender to Major 
 General Scott the assurance of his high respect and 
 esteem. 
 
 JOHN FAIRFIELD. 
 
 (From Bangor Whig, April 12, 1839.) 
 THE SOLDIER S RETURN. 
 
 On Wednesday evening, about 6 o clock, the Bangor 
 Independent Volunteers marched into the city, under 
 command of Lieut. Dunning, on their return from the 
 Aroostook. The Company numbered about fifty, princi 
 pally young men, who are known as among the most 
 respectable and enterprising of the city. We were 
 rejoiced to preceive so much interest and spirit mani 
 fested at their return. They marched with a firm and 
 elastic step, to the tune of Home ! Sweet Home ! The 
 appropriateness of the music to the ocassion, excited one 
 common impulse of satisfaction. We have rarely known 
 an instance which appealed so directly to the heart. 
 
 Tuesday evening, the Hancock Guards, a rifle com 
 pany, under command of Capt. Wing, arrived, also. 
 This is a fine company, from Castine and Bluehill. They 
 were furnished for the campaign with Hall s Patent 
 Rifles. 
 
 The appearance and bearing of these Companies do 
 honor to the Militia of the State, and to their com 
 mander, Gen. Hodsdon. They have discipline and skill, 
 almost equal to regular troops and perform the duties of 
 the soldier in a manner deserving great praise. Let 
 those who have been induced to speak lightly of the 
 militia system, view these men and ask themselves, 
 where else they would look for defence of our country 
 against foreign aggression. And who are the men who 
 
[115] 
 
 deserve sympathy and respect, if not those who so 
 willingly have borne the hardships and privations of a 
 winter campaign exposed to all the fatigues they are 
 called upon to endure. 
 
 Gen. Hodsdon, a few days ago, ordered Col. Stevens to 
 Bangor, to cause temporary Barracks to be erected on 
 Thomas s Hill for the accommodation of the troops on 
 their return. They will rendezvous at this place and be 
 paid off as fast as may be convenient. It will however, 
 be a work of several days. The men were principally 
 supplied with arms by the State, and their old guns will 
 be returned to them when the State s arms are surrended. 
 As the troops will come in by companies or small detach 
 ments, some days must necessarily elapse, before they 
 can be paid off and disbanded. 
 
 We think Gen. Hodsdon deserves much praise for his 
 forethought in this matter. We all recollect the incon 
 venience of quartering 600 men under Gen. Bachelder s 
 command in the midst of the city. Besides, these 
 soldiers deserve better treatment, after their long march 
 through the mud, than to be crowded in large companies 
 of 50 or 60 men, into a room or two, 15 by 18, at this 
 season of the year. We suppose they will be reviewed 
 here by Gen. Hodsdon, and our citizens gratified by a 
 display of their military discipline. 
 
 LETTER EROM JAMES SULLIVAN. 
 
 Scoodiac Falls, Sept r 29th, 1796. 
 Brother : 
 
 I came here with a hope to see you I am 
 agent for the United States to appear before men who 
 are appointed to find the river the United States and the 
 King called St. Croix when the States became a great 
 
[116] 
 
 nation. The men who are come and coming, want to 
 hear what your old men can tell them truly on that 
 question. I invite you to come before them with three 
 or four of your old men at St. Andrews on friday the 
 next week. I want you to tell them what is there 
 and I will pay you for your time what ever is right 
 Brother : 
 
 You know that the United States is your 
 friend you know that Massachusetts considers your 
 tribe as her children and you will not be unwilling to 
 come at their call to tell the truth. 
 
 I am your Brother 
 
 JAMES SULLIVAN. 
 
 To Francis Joseph Governor the 
 Passimaquody Indians. 
 
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 AN INITIAL PINE OF 25 CENTS 
 
 WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN 
 
 DUE THE 
 
 DAY AND 
 OVERDUE 
 
 
 SEVEN 
 
 _~ o\y is?r 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 ; - 
 
 MArf 2t : 7 
 
 
 
 
 LD 21-100m-8, 34 
 
YD 06473 
 
 
 /. 
 
 398 
 
 ,Sa 
 
 221044